•NRLF 


LIBRA* 

I    •  UNIVERSITY 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 
THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 


IN  MEMORY  OF 
CAROLINE  GUSHING  DUNIWAY 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS, 


OR  HINTS  OF  THE 


PHILOSOPHY  OF  MAN  AND  NATURE. 


TO   WHICH  ARE  APPENDED 


TWO  POETICAL  SCRAPS, 


AND 


DOGMAS  OF  INFIDELITY 


BY  F.  VV.  ADAMS.  M.  D. 


MONTPELIER: 

PUBLISHED  BY  J.  E.  THOMPSON. 
1843. 


4PAN  STACK 
W<4JsTAA*AS*' 


ERRATA. 

Page  75,  6th  line,  for  if  ignorant,  read  of  ignorance. 

"      "     23th   "      for  Pity,  read  Piety. 

"     83,  8th     "      for  Nature,  read  Matter. 

"  87,  13th  "  for  the  propensities,  read  propen- 
sities. 

"     88,  last    "      for  of,  read  or. 

"     102,  2d    "      for  Manatau,  read  Manatou. 

"     108,  9th  "      for  severitees,  read  severities. 

"     110,  7th  "      for  further,  read  any  further. 

"  115,  last"  for  cowardice,  read  moral  coward- 
ice. 

"     116,  2d    "      for  threat,  read  threats. 

"     132.11th"      for  infringe,  read  impinge. 

"     144,  21st  "      for  Emphyrean,  read  Empyrean. 

"     208,  last  "      for  general,  read  generous. 


f.Ts 


TO  THE  READER. 

HAVING  been  particularly  known  among  my  familiar 
acquaintances,  and,  reputedly,  by  the  public  within 
my  vicinity,  as  an  avowed  dissenter  from  the  literality 
and  supernatural  i?ni  of  the  Scriptures,  in  which  there 
seemed  enough  of  singularity,  to  induce  a  curious  in- 
dividual to  solicit,  from  time  to  time,  during  several 
years,  a  publication  of  my  anti-theolgical  opinions,  to 
which  however,  circumstances  forbade  assent;  until, 
at  length,  I  was  importuned  by  letter,  at  two  several 
times,  from  a  reverened  disciple  of  Universalism,  to 
make  the  curious  disclosure:  And  hence  concluded  to 
comply,  and,  therefore,  set  about  expending,  occa- 
sionally, a  leisure  hour,  in  noting  some  few  reflect- 
ions upon  the  subjects  of  inquiry.  This  I  was  the 
more  willing  to  undertake,  from  the  clearest  convict- 
ion, that  Theology  unconnected  with  Morality,  was  a 
phamom  which  had  seduced  or  frightened  the  world 
into  its  most  terrible  and  exterminating  evils.  And 
that  even  Christianity,  in  which  Morality,  as  it  seems 
to  have  been  particularly  intended,  strikingly  pre- 
dominates over  Theology,  has  been  the  subject  and 
occasion  of  the  most  cruel  and  murderous  dissention : 


929 


IV  PREFACE. 

A  consequence,  it  would  be  blasphemous  to  charge 
upon  Truth  or  Reason.  And  having,  from  my  child- 
hood, detested  the  moral  cowardice,  so  well  exempli- 
fied in  its  character  and  consequences,  by  the  fictitious 
Jonah,  on  the  one  hand;  arid,  on  the  other,  equally 
idolized  the  moral  courage  of  the  Hebrew  Daniel, 
in  whom  this  attribute  is  made  so  godly  and  moment- 
ous, as  that  miracles  were  reputedly  performed  to 
save  the  subject  of  so  magnanimous  a  soul. 

Hence,  I  resolved  upon  the  hazard  of  a  publica- 
tion, in  the  form  of  a  letter,  or  rather  a  series  of  let- 
ters, to  the  reverend  solicitor;  and  which  had  made  con- 
siderable progress  toward  its  conclusion,  when  I  was 
interrogated  on  behalf  of  some  dozens  of  my  friends, 
whether  I  would  address  them  in  a  course  of  public 
lectures,  upon  the  questions  I  had  essayed  to  discuss 
in  the  letter  series. 

No  other  objector  appearing,  than  that  ignominious 
huzzy,  who  seduced  Jonah  to  take  lodgings  in  the 
stomach  of  a  whale;  and  she  being  annihilated  by  a 
single  scowl,  the  recollection  of  Daniel  developed, 
my  consent  was  given;  and  the  letters  adopted  as  the 
basis  of  the  following  essays,  into  which  they  were 
very  conveniently  transformed.  And  being  subse- 
quently solicited  for  the  manuscript  for  publication, 
this  little  volume  has  come  out  to  testify  to  my  cour- 
tesy, sincerity  and  moral  courage. 

These  lectures,  though  originating  in  specific  inqui- 
ries, and  therefore  appearing  to  claim  the  character 
of  specific  answers,  were  nevertheless  written,  under 
th  assumption  of  a  general  license,  and  are.  there- 


fore,  designedly,  rather  elicitations  to  theological  in- 
quiry than  solutions  of  numerous  and  reputedly  mys- 
terious problems.  I  would  that  every  individual 
should  not  only  have  opinions  upon  all  subjects  of  hu- 
man interest,  but.  that  they  should  be  sanctioned  by 
Reason  and  justified  by  truth.  And  however  harshly 
custom  and  expediency  may  growl  at  such  opinions, 
as  innovations  upon  hereditary  rights,  Experience, 
Posterity  and  Nature  will  ultimately  and  cheerfully 
accord  their  approbation ! 

One  consideration,  however,  more  than  any  other, 
which  has  embarrassed  both  the  oral  and  typographi- 
cal announcement  of  my  peculiar  dogmas,  is  that 
most  plausible  of  all  stupefacti  ves  to  the  geni  us  of  inno- 
vation, viz.,  that  the  present  state  of  opinions  and 
practices  should  not  be  unsettled  upon  any  other  pr ill- 
principle,  than  that  of  the  offer  of  a  more  valuable 
substitute. 

Justice  and  generosity,  both,  emphatically  demand 
a  strict  observance  of  this  rule,  whenever  it  falls  with- 
in the  power  of  the  agent:  And  yet  there  are  so 
many  exceptions,  as  to  embarrass,  essentially,  the  au- 
thority of  the  rule;  especially  where  one  hypothesis 
is  to  be  contested  by  another;  and  where  Facts  refrain, 
us  much  as  possible,  fVom  giving  evidence. 

This  embarrassment  is  at  length  overcome  by  the 
settled  conviction,  that  Theology  is  not  only  a  fiction, 
but  that  were  it  otherwise,  it  would  be  a  dark  and 
profitless  subject  for  human  con  templation;belonginga.s 
it  does  exclusively  to  God  and  his  spiritual  providence , 
and  one  that  He  would  scarcely  thank  his  creatures,  for 


VI  PREFACE. 

assisting  Him  to  manage.  Beside,  it  seems  most 
irrefragible,  that  Morality,  the  very  Genius.  Christ, 
or  Savior,  of  Society,  has  been  slandered,  disparaged 
and  trodden  upon  by  this  cloven-footed,  leaden-head- 
ed progeny  of  Barbarism,  until  the  very  heart  of 
Reason  should  burst  with  indignation.  But  so  long 
as  Ethics  shall  remain  subordinate  to  a  decrepid,  fic- 
titious Spiritualism,  it  will  continue  to  be  starved  and 
{scourged  into  a  degraded  dwarfishness  and  imbecility, 
wherein  it  vainly  attempts  to  repel  the  indignities  its 
effeminacy  has  elicited.  Yes,  whilst  Ethics,  which, 
with  proper  nourishment  and  care,  is  competent  to 
rear  the  standard  of  literal  salvation  is  destructively 
neglected,  Theology  is  petted,  for  its  fallacious  promi- 
ses of  a  future  fiction. 

Now,  if  Theology  is  a  fiction,  it  is,  at  least,  a  waste 
of  thought  to  contemplate  it,  and  its  influence  must, 
after  all  the  expense  of  its  support,  be  nugatory  or 
mischievous;  hence  the  demand  for  a  substitute  needs 
not  to  be  recognized.  To  reflect  upon  any  thing  that 
is,  must  be  preferable  to  reflecting  upon  nothing  at  all. 
But,  if  it  is  not  a  fiction,  it  has  both  God  and  Nature 
to  support  it,  and  hence  defies  subversion. 

Thus,  is  the  Reader,  not  quite  unceremoniously, 
introduced  to  our  legitimate,  dogmatical  and  hypo- 
thetical progeny,  from  which,  as  he  cannot  fail  to  ob- 
serve, a  foot,  at  least,  has  been  amputated,  for  the 
convenience  of  the  Printer;  and  perhaps  not  less  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  Reader;  since,  whatever  lessens 
a  deformity,  proportionally  improves  it. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


OF  INFIDELITY. 


Nature  is  an  uncreated,  indivisible  and  unlimited 
system  of  matter  and  functionality;  whose  eternity  is 
no  more  difficult  to  admit,  than  that  of  an  antece- 
dent creator:  Nor  is  humanity  competent  to  acquire 
an  earlier  idea  of  things,  than  that  which  is  expressed 
by  the  term,  formation  !  Thus,  when  it  is  said  that 
a  thing  is  made,  nothing  more  can  be  understood,  than 
that  a  portion  of  preexisting  material  has  assumed  a 
new  arrangement  of  its  parts,  or  atoms,  denominated, 
accurately,  a  new  formation,  but  much  more  frequent- 
ly, miscalled  a  new  creation  ! 

The  idea  of  God  is  identical  with  that  of  ultimate 
causality,  of  which  no  other  knowledge  can  be  obtain- 
ed, than  that  of  its  logical  necessity,  as  a  termination 
of  all  philosophic  inquiry;  and  appears  to  be  insus- 
ceptible of  any  better  definition,  than  that  it  is  another 
name  for  ignorance:  For  God  is  never  referred  to, 
whilst  any  apprehensible,  specific  cause  remains  avail- 
able. And  were  there  a  God,  detached  from  matter, 
with  the  attribute  we  call  intelligence,  in  an  infinite 
degree,  the  continuance  of  his  being,  beyond  the  pe- 


VIM  DOGMAS    OF 

riocl  of  a  single  thought,  would  be  entirely  nugatory. 
Suppose  a  God,  such  as  it  maybe  thought  Christian- 
ity hath  assumed,  and  Plato's  brain  engendered  of  ul- 
timate causality  personified;  and,  subsequently,  en- 
dowed with  that  trinity  of  attributes,  called  wisdom, 
power  and  goodness,  so  indispensable  to  such  a  char- 
acter! Can  there  be  a  doubt,  that  wisdom,  such  as 
God's,  and  called  of  men  omnisciency,  would  scan  suc- 
cessfully, the  laws  and  their  relationship,  by  which  a 
world's  phenomena  were  intended  to  be  governed; 
or  that  a  single  thought  would  settle  their  arrange- 
ment? And  who  believes,  that  more  than  one  determi- 
nation of  omnipotence,  would  be  required  to  put  those 
laws  in  operation? — Is  God  immutable? — He,  there- 
fore, would  not  modify  his  own  decrees! — Isheomnip- 
otent? — No  other  power  could  do  it! — And  hence,  the 
supervisionship  of  such  a  God,  would  be  as  nugato- 
ry, as  the  idea  of  his  being  is  fallacious! 

Were  it  not  an  uudefinable  causality,  of  which  man- 
kind has  wrought  its  deity;  that  dogma,  without  the 
aid  of  superhuman  revelation,  could  never  have  be- 
come so  universal  as  it  has  been;  and  doubtless  would 
not  have  been  acquired  at  all ! — Hence,  the  universal- 
ity of  the  idea  of  God  is  applicable  only  to  such  a 
principle;  and  not  at  all  to  that  discrepancy  of  attri- 
butes, with  which  a  diverse  human  fancy  has  endowed 
its  personification. 

Notwithstanding  the  existence  of  matter,  like  that 
of  God,  has  readily  obtained  universal  belief,  it  is, 
nevertheless,  a  problem,  whose  truth  can  never  be  de- 
monstrated. It  is,  naturally,  deducible  from  the  ideas 


INFIDELITY.  IX 

it  is  supposed  to  develope,  and  the  properties  of  which 
it  is  supposed  to  be  the  predicate,  and  yet  its  intrinsi- 
cality  must,  forever,  elude  investigation., 

Matter  may  be  supposed  to  possess  an  ultimate  be- 
ing and  functionality;  a  state  it  may  successively  re- 
sume, in  imitation  of  its  original,  at  the  termination 
of  each  complete  revolution  of  its  metamorphosis; 
and  below  which,  it  is  incapable  of  reduction,  or  sim- 
plification. 

Life  is  a  supposed  principle,  to  whose  agency  or- 
ganic phenomena  have  been  exclusively  referred;  and 
which  may  be  contemplated  in  the  triple  character  of 
ultimate,  structural  and  functional. 

Ultimate,  or  primitive  life,  may  be  defined,  to  be  that 
connate,  or  coeternal,  attribute  of  matter,  upon  which 
modification,  or  transformation,  originally  depends; 
and  without  which,  as  without  ultimate  causality,  no 
phenomenon  could  ever  occur.  Structural  life  is  that 
modification  of  ultimate  life,  npon  which  the  arrange- 
ment of  appropriate  material,  into  specific  organiza- 
tion, depends;  from  the  mushroom  to  the  mimosa,  in 
vegetation,  and  from  the  sponge  and  polypus  to  man, 
in  animation;  in  all  of  which,  it  may  be  rationally  pre- 
sumed, the  parenchyma*  is,  organically,  the  same. 
Functional  life  is  that  which  results  from,  and  is  char- 
acterized by,  organization,  upon  which  the  two  pre- 
ceding kinds  of  life  have  been  already  employed;  and 

*  By  parenchyma  is  meant  the  common  organized 
material  of  which  particular  organs  are  constructed. 

1 


DOGMAS    OF 


is  either  constituent,  as  in  particular  organs,  or  aggre- 
gate, as  in  the  whole  animal;  which  latter  state  is  de- 
nominated animal  life,  whereon  are  established  the  pe- 
culiar relations  that  exist,  between  sentient  beings, 
and  the  objects  of  sensation. 

Every  phenomenon  of  the  living  animal  is  a  modi- 
fication of  the  state  of  organism,  of  which  the  phe- 
nomenon is  a  function:  whether  it  be  structural  or  an- 
irnal — physical  or  psychological. 

Whilst  the  action  of  a  muscle  developes  the  phe- 
nomenon of  motion,  that  of  the  braiii  constitutes  con- 
sciousness: And  the  inactivity  of  the  one  is  denomi- 
nated rest — of  the  other  sleep.  Psychology,  therefore, 
consists  of  organic  phenomena;  and  should  never 
tjave  been  displaced,  from  its  legitimate  position,  at 
the  head  of  physical  philosophy. 

Metaphysics  is  no  otherwise  associated  with,  nor 
less  dependent  upon,  anatomy  and  physiology,  than 
mechanics,  with,  or  upon,  mechanism.  And  these,  as 
well  as  all  other  sciences,  are  but  deductions  from 
facts,  contemplated  in  their  several  legitimate  rela- 
tions. 

Man  consists,  firstly,  of  a  parenchyma,  which  is  the 
common  basis  of  all  organism,  to  which  are  superadd- 
ed,  and  of  the  same  material,  differently  arranged,  all 
^hose  peculiar  apparatuses,  which  constitute  him,  in 
the  aggregate,  a  living,  moving,  sentient,  conscious, 
enduring,  and  reproductive  machine: — For,  machine 
he  is,  notwithstanding  his  obstinate  and  egotistic  ad- 
herence to  the  fallacious  dogma,  of  freed om-of-the- 
will,  upon  which  psychological  phantom,  M.  Cousin, 


INFIDELITY. 


the  present  supervisor  of  the  classical  literature  of 
France,  together  with  a  host  of  infatuated  disciples, 
has  exhausted  every  hypothetical  and  sophistical  re- 
source.. Nor  will  posterity  deem  it  an  abuse  of  his 
arguments  that  we  denominate  them  mere  blarney. 

Nature  is  a  system  of  adaptations,  denominated 
cause  and  effect,  within  which,  men  and  mushroons 
are  equally  included;  and  of  equal  importance,  in  its 
mysterious  and  interminable  revolutions:  Nor  is  man, 
with  all  his  wild  conceit  of  voluntary  independence, 
one  whit  less  subject  to  the  dominion  of  physical  and 
natural  laws,  than  though  he  were  a  mass  of  unmodi- 
fied material.  Curious,  that  Nature  should  h:ive 
formed  an  animal  to  take  precedence  of  herself! 

Organization  is  a  structural  arrangement  of  elabo- 
rated material,  derived  from  the  common  stock  of  el- 
ements, and  subsequently  transmuted,  Iby  the  agency 
of  organic  life,  into  the  specific  constituents  of  the 
specimen  referred  to — each  intermediate  order,  be- 
tween the  two  extremes  of  the  graduated  scale,  heing 
nourished  by  an  inferior,  and,  in  turn,  yielding  itself 
as  the  nourishment  of  a  superior,  and  so  on  to  the 
end  of  the  chapter;  presenting,  thus,  a  series  of  re- 
volving adaptive  transmutation. — A  circle,  in  which 
man  and  common  matter  ultimately  meet;  and  which 
has  been,  theologically,  misinterpreted,  and  errone- 
ously propagated  as  infinite  design. 

Man,  from  the  time  of  Socrates,  has  been  contem- 
plated, as  consisting  of  body  and  soul — or  of  a  mate- 
rial, physical  organism,  to  which  an  immaterial,  unor- 
ganized and  immortal  spirit  is  somehow,  and  at  some 
period,  superadded. 


XII  DOGMAS    OF 

This  <}ogma,  of  an  immortal  spirit,  which  Socrates 
had  presented  to  the  world,  in  a  state  of  nudity,  was 
zealously  adopted,  by  the  spiritual  enthusiast,  Plato, 
who,  laboriously  and  ingeniously  clothed  up  the  falla- 
cy, with  all  the  fascinations  of  an  invaluable  truth; 
which,  being  thus  presented  to  man's  strongest  pro- 
pensity, his  love  of  lite,  could,  scarcely,  have  failed  of 
a  ready  and  unanimous  acceptance.  But  unanimity 
of  belief  can  never  deserve  credit,  as  evidence  of  sci- 
entific, or  philosophic  truth,  since  the  mass,  even  of 
the  intelligent  portion  of  mankind,  has  been  found, 
contentedly,  groping,  in  the  unprogressive  routine  of 
traditionary  prejudice,  and  hereditary  obstinacy,  a  half 
century,  at  least,  behind  the  foot-prints  of  the  Genius 
of  social  amelioration:  Nor  has  it,  ever,  acquired  a 
knowledge  of  those  principles  of  science,  to  the  truth 
of  which,  it  has,  finally,  given  a  tardy  assent.  Man- 
kind are,  constantly,  witnessing  the  phenomena,  and 
participating  the  benefits,  of  science,  of  whose  princi- 
ples, they  are  as  ignorant,  as  of  the  statistics  of  the 
moon:  and  yet,  their  vanity  vociferates — "How  wise 
our  generation  !v — Nor,  meanwhile,  think  how  in- 
significant have  been  their,  or  their  father's,  contribu- 
tions to  that  stock  of  wisdom;  nor  how  small  a  part 
they,  individually,  share! 

Man  consists  of  structural  organism,  and  consequent 
functionality,  of  which  brain  and  consciousness  are 
important  particulars:  Nor  is  the  latter,  which  is  sy- 
nonymous with  soul,  one  whit  more  spiritual, than  the 
elasticity  of  steel.  He  is,  indeed,  what  reputed  in- 
spiration, a  long  time  since,  interpreted  him — "a  liv- 


INFIDELITY. 

ing  soul" — Or  in  other  words,  a  thinkingcreature.  It 
is  written.  Gen.  2.  7.  "And  the  Lord  God  formed  man 
of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and  breathed  into  his  nos- 
trils the  breath  of  life;  and  man  became  a  living  soul." 
And  who  can  have  been  so  stupid,  as  to  have  innp- 
centiy  interpreted  this  text  of  sciripture,  to  mean 
that  the  soul  of  man  is  not  a  function  of  his  organism,, 
or  that  it  was  superadded,  subsequently  to  such  for- 
mation, while  the  text  expressly  declares  the  man  to  be 
the  living  soul? 

Whilst  reflection  cannot  miss  a  thousand  evidences, 
that  the  soul  is  functional,  exclusively;  HO  counter 
one  has  been  adduced,  which  might  not  be  as  well  ap- 
plied affirmatively. 

Whilst  Truth  will  never  fail  to  repay  the  labor  of 
investigation;  Error,  like  a  hibernating  reptile,  will 
sting  the  hand  that  warms  it  into  vigor!  Theology 
is  a  human  fantasy,  which  possesses  neither  a  type  in 
Nature,  nor  affinity  with  Reason! 

Natural  Theology  is  an  unnatural  dogma,  with 
\vhich,  affectation  of  piety  has,  abortively,  attempted 
to  relieve  the  accumulating  embarrassments  of  a  fic- 
titious revelation ! 

Notwithstanding  Christianity,  as  delineated  in  the 
Gospel,  is}/undeniably,  a  most  successful  compilation 
of  the  highest  and  purest  metaphysical,  moral  and  re- 
ligious dogmas,  of  which  the  world  was  in  possession 
at  its  date;  it  is,  nevertheless,  pregnant  with  fallacies 
too  numerous  and  palpable,  to  escape  the  notice  of  an 
unprejudiced,  modern  school-boy! 

The  Gospel,  which  is,  now,  almost  universally,  be-r 

1 


x'lV  DOGMAS    OF 

lieved  to  have  been  supernaturally  communicated  to 
mankind,  through  the  incomprehensible  medium  of 
the  fictitious  Son  of  God,  is  cognizable,  only,  as  a 
judicious  and  convenient  compendium  of  the  an- 
cient Eclectic  Philosophy,  of  which  Philo,  the  Essen 
Jew,  was  an  eminent  disciple,  and  promulgator;  and 
who,  it  may  be  well  enough  supposed,  in  his  abundant 
affection  for  his  national  kindred,  wrote  out  a  copy,  in 
his  o\vn  peculiar  style,  and  in  the  Jewish,  allegorical 
manner,  in  the  laudable  hope,  that  it  would  be  adopt- 
ed, by  his  ignorant  and  superstitious  brethren,  as  an 
invaluable  substitute  for  the  fallacies  and  bigotries  of 
Judaism. 

Christianity  is  compounded  of  Theology  and  Ethics; 
wherein  the  fantasms  of  the  former,  are  sustained  by 
the  realities  of  the  latter. 

Whilst  Ethics  forms  the  most  eminent  department 
of  Natural  knowledge,  nor  needs  an  adjunct  to  sustain 
itself;  Theology  would,  long  since,  have  arrived  at 
a  state  of  insupportable  decrepitude,  had  it  been  de- 
prived of  Ethics  to  lean  upon  ! 

Theology,  in  consonance  with  its  own  fictitious- 
ness,  has  instituted  a  censorship  of  Faith,  instead  of 
Fact,  which  denominates  all  else,  mere  scoria  of  the 
truth,  save  wkat  has  passed,  unscathed,  the  crucible 
of  its  fanaticism:  It  has,  grimly,  scowled  at  nat- 
ural science,  as  an  unholy  obtruder  upon  its  sanctimo- 
ny, and  a  subverter  of  its  superhuman  truths;  and 
has  never  failed  to  persecute  the  man,  while  living, 
nor  to  heap  up  obloquy  upon  hisname,  when  dead,  who 
has  ever  ventured  to  propagate  a  truth,  that  threaten- 
ed a  collision  with  the  fallacies  of  its  creed. 


INFIDELITY.  XV 

The  whole  superstructure  of  modern  Theology  i* 
erected  upon  a  Socratic  or  Platonic  fiction  of  the  hu- 
man soul,  which,  both,  fact  and  reason  emphatically 
repadiate.  And,  if  there  were,  both,  God  and  soul, 
they  would  be  inexplicable  to  humanity,  and  also 
themselves  subjected  to  Zeno's  Fate,  or  that  Necessi- 
ty, imposed  by  the  laws  of  their  nature. 

Whilst  the  falsehood  has  been  vociferously  reitera- 
ted, throughout  the  wide  domain  of  Christendom,  that 
natural  science  owes  to  Christianity,  its  success;  a 
counter  truth  is  stamped  on  every  page  of  civil  histo- 
ry: And,  if  doubt  remains  upon  this  plain  question,  you 
are  directed  to  enquire  of  the  ghosts  of  Roger  Bacon, 
Nicholas1  Copernicus  and  Galileo  Galilei ! 


LECTURE  I. 

THE    PRIMITIVE    CHARACTER    OF    MAN. 

Friends  of  Free  Enquiry : — 

It  is  not  from  the  instigation  of  a  love  of  notoriety, 
nor  for  the  unenviable  privilege  of  suffering  persecu- 
tion for  a  frank  avowal  of  my  peculiar  heterodoxy, 
that  I  stand  here  this  evening,  as  a  traitor  to  my  own 
popularity,  as  though  I  were  insanely  soliciting  the 
honor  of  martyrdom;  but  in  a  self-distrustful  obedi- 
ence to  your  joint  solicitation  for  a  public  disclosure 
of  my  personal  views  of  some  particular  questions, 
in  whose  satisfactory  solution,  the  world  possesses  a 
deeper  interest  than  even  the  querulous  obstinacy, 
with  which  they  have  been  contested,  indicates:  And 
my  first  wish  is,  that  you  were  in  possession  of  a  rea- 
sonable assurance,  that  your  hope  of  edification  is  not 
altogether  futile. 

The  peculiar  character  of  the  present  enterprise 
seems  to  demand  that  this  introductory  lecture  should 
consist  mostly  of  its  own  preface,  declarative  of  the 
sentiments  by  which  we  are  actuated,  and  the  objects 


18  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

to  !>e  attained:  And  while  I  express  the  following  per- 
x  >nai  views,  I  may  hope  that  the  heart  of  every  audi- 
tor will  heat  an  unequivocal  response. 

Man  id  allowed  to  have  been  born  with  certain  inal- 
ienable rights  and  privileges,  to  which  Nature  haa 
given  him  an  irrevocable  title:  Nor  is  she,  whatever 
it.s  seeming,  justly  chargeable  with  partiality  in  the 
distribution  of  her  favors... 

If  the  philosopher  is  delighted  with  the  success  of 
his  investigations;  he  is  also  annoyed  with  contempla- 
ting the  narrowness  by  which  they  are  limited:  And 
whilst  he  regrets  the  insignificancy  of  hjs  best  acquire- 
ments, "  the  fool  is  happy,  that  he  knows  no  more." 
Thus  is  the  impartiality  of  Nature  established,  in  re- 
•pect  of  intellectual  happiness.  All  rational  political, 
philosophy  concurs  in  admitting  tljat  all  social  privi- 
leges should  be  reciprocal — or  that  no,  individual  shall 
claim  a  right  to  do,  for  and  of  himself,  an  act,  from 
which  any  other  individual,  under  similar  circumstan- 
ces, is  prohibited. 

Earth,  air  and  water,  witha.ll  their  convertible  pro- 
ducts, are  the  common  property  of  their  human  in- 
heritors— and  Wisdom  emphatically  declares,  thai 
such  a  distribution  and  use,  should  be  made  of  them, 
n.i  to  insure  the  greatest  amount  of  innocent  enjoy- 
ment. And  yet  they  are  mostly  monopolized,  by  a 
very  small  proportion  of  our  species;  no.r  would  th« 
air  itself  be  excluded  from  the  list,  were  it  subject  to 
the  arbitrary  regulation  of  meets  and  bounds:  And 
tho  poor  might  gasp,  or  bend  in  servitude  to  its  owner, 
fir  the  material  of  vital  respiration. 


THEOLOGICAL    CBITICISMS.  J0 

Air  is,  however,  most  fortunately  free;  nor  is  opin- 
ion, however  unfortunately,  less  BO. 

To  coerce  opinion  has,  nevertheless,  beca  arbitra- 
rily, mischievously  and  abortively  attempted  by  every 
generation  that  History  has  recognized  i  And  millicr.'* 
have  fought  and  bled  und  died  in  a  contest,  of  which 
children  should  have  been  ashamed. 

Opinion  being  the  inalienable  property  of  every  in- 
dividual, the  acquisition  of  which  can  never  b*  r!ij»- 
bonestj  nor  its  possession  dishonorable,  should  never 
be  assailed,  but  by  the  kindest  expressions  that  suc- 
cessful invalidation  will  justify;  nor  attempted  so  be 
•subverted-,  but  with  the  commendable  expectation  of 
•  uhstituting  a  better. 

Reason  is  the  grand  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
humanity;  find  is  therefore  appropriately  subservient, 
to  its  highest  purposes:  And  the  higher,  and  more  ab- 
stract from  mere  propensity  our  objects  are,  the  more 
is  roa.son  required  in  their  examination:  Whatever  )s 
above  reason  is  above  humanity;  and  whatever  its  in- 
fluence upon  the  species,  it  can  never  become  an  ob- 
ject of  consciousness.  Nor  is  there  a  plausible  prof- 
oaitiou  that  suffers  more  from  analysis,  than  «i  very 
popular  one  among  the  clergy;  viz.  "that  revelation 
begins  where  reason  ends;  and  yet,  that  reason  clearly 
tees  the  need  of  such  a  revelation." 

That  the  need  of  a  circumstance,  should  be  clearij 
apprehended  whilst  its  character  is  entrrely  unknown, 
is  a  proposition  that  cannot  bear  the  slightest  icn*- 
tiny.  As  well  might  the  hungry  be  said  to  see  tbs 
n«ed  of  bread,  before  it  wfts  known  to  be  nutritious. 


20  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

But  the  world  is  full  of  this  kind  of  sophistry,  there- 
in sound  is  offered  and  accepted  as  a  substitute  for 
sense.  Wherein  unembelished  Truth  surrenders  its 
rightful  dominion  to  furbished  and  artful  fallacy.  Nor 
are  men  aware  how  easily  they  are  deceived  by  high- 
sounding,  though  unmeaning  sentences ;  nor  how 
much  nor  often,  familiar  terms  are  perverted  from 
their  original  and  genuine  interpretation,  in  order  to 
subserve  the  purposes  of  a  sect. 

However  differently  the  case  may  stand  with  others, 
it  is  clearly  my  own  conviction,  that  Reason  unequiv- 
ocally discharges  me  from  all  responsibility,  for  either 
the  possession  or  propagation  of  opinion.  For  if  any 
individual  has  a  right  to  express  an  opinion,  whose 
accuracy  is  not  already  acknowledged  by  the  public, 
that  right  belongs,  equally,  to  the  rest  of  the  popula- 
tion. And  if  such  a  right  were  not  acknowledged, 
and  its  practical  consequences  permitted,  where,  allow 
me  to  ask,  would  be  found  the  history  of  human  im- 
provement? 

When  was  the  public  ever  known  to  suggest  an  im- 
provement? or,  an  occasional  genius  having  made  tin 
ameliorating  suggestion,  when  was  the  public  ever 
known,  promptly,  to  afford  it  a  practical  illustration  r 
Have  not  the  originators  of  important  improvements 
of  the  various  interests  of  their  species,  slept,  long 
and  soundly,  with  their  fathers,  before  their  stupid 
successors  have  been  able  to  appreciate  the  value  of 
their  suggestions?  Alas!  this  public,  that  arrogates 
to  itself  the  attributes  of  a  god,  marches,  nevertheless, 
in  the  rearward  shadow  of  that  adventurous,  invent- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  11 

»vc  Genius,  to  whom  the  world  is  irredeemably  in- 
debted— and  whose  statue,  if  ever  wrought,  is  erected 
upon  a  pyramid  of  antecedent  reproaches. 

Reason,  however  fallacious,  is  the  only  guardian  of 
human  actions;  nor,  should  propensity,  in  any  case, 
digress  its  most  fastidious  prescriptions.  Yet,  how 
differently  has  been  the  case  with  all  successive  ger*e- 
rations — or  history  belies  their  character! 

Man  has  been  effectually  shown  up,  as  the  creature 
of  propensity,  too  indomitably  obstinate  for  exhorta- 
tion, or  even  experience,  to  improve.  And  still  he 
rails,  each  against  his  neighbor,  for  the  slightest  scent 
of  inconsistency,  that  the  sensitive  and  obtrusive  nose 
of  suspicion  is  able  to  smell  out,  even,  amongst  tha 
privacies  of  domestic  life.  Whilst  he  enviously  and 
maliciously  assails  his  neighbor's  happiness,  he  igco- 
rantly,  though  deservedly  thwarts  his  own.  His  life 
is  a  succession  of  fears  and  disasters,  that  Reason, 
were  her  admonitions  heeded,  would  enable  him  to 
evade:  But,  to  her  utter  discouragement,  man  has  su- 
perstitiously  adopted  a  set  of  fictitious  mysticisms, 
under  the  cognomen  of  Theology,  by  which  she  is 
nearly  superceded  in  her  highest  vocation  with  hu- 
manity. 

Start  not  at  a  mere  declaration,  which  is  of  no  mo- 
ment whatever,  unless  supported  by  satisfactory  ar- 
gument; and  which,  when  thus  supportedj  must  right- 
fully supercede  its  antagonist:  For  Truth,  however 
threatening  in  the  distance,  is  always  peaceful  in  pos- 
session! 

For  myself,  I  am  not  ashamed  to  own,  that  !  am  a 


tS  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

devout  disciple  of  Reason;  and  an  anxious,  however 
iucccssless,  inquirer  after  truth,  whose  homeliest 
physiognomy,  however  often  and  grossly  misappre- 
hended, is  really  mbre  beautiful  than  error,  with  ell 
fcd  paint  and  furbishing. 

Opinions  being  always  honestly  acquired,  their  eor,- 
sequences,  however  disastrous,  are  chargeable  only  as 
misfortunes,  not  as  crimes. 

Opinions,  it  is  true,  should  be  always  right,  since 
erroneous  ones  possess,  more  or  less,  untoward  ten- 
dencies, from  which  Ignorance  has  taken  occasion  to 
excuse  the  exercise  of  its  malevolence,  wherein  noth- 
ing but  the  kindest  sympathy  is  justifiable. 

The  most  unfortunate  individual  is  he,  whose  hap- 
piness is  most  marred  by  the  inaccuracy  of  his  opin- 
ions; and  he  the  most  fortunate,  the  accuracy  of 
whose  opinions,  most  successfully,  provides  for  his 
welfare. 

A  common  error  with  mankind,  is  the  too  precipi- 
tate formation  of  opinion,  whereby  his  best  exertions 
work  out  his  worst  discomfiture.  As  with  the  travol- 
fsr  who  misses  his  road,  and  is  therefore  the  farther 
from  his  way,  the  longer  and  more  expeditiously  he 
travels.  Hence  opinion,  should  be  deliberately  nnd 
carefully  formed,  and  as  far  as  possible,  founded  in  a 
dear  apprehension  of  all  the  truths  concerned  in  iu 
institution.  Thus,  Truth  becomes  the  primary  acd 
paramount  object  of  human  inquiry;  and  should  nei- 
ther be  mistaken  nor  contemned,  by  arbitrary,  obsu- 
rrate  prejudice,  scarcely  Jess  blind  to  truth  than  to 
itoelf. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  23 

Whatever  is  seriously  proposed  as  truth,  should  be 
patiently  and  carefully  examined  before  it  is  rejected. 
Who  would  not  declare  it  preposterous  for  a  cherniet 
ti>  throw  away,  unexamined,  a  specimeu  of  precious 
ore,  because  he  is  not  already  acquainted  with  its 
character?  And  opinions,  with  all  their  dependen- 
cies, deserve  no  less  to  be  analyzed, than  unexamined 
tpecimens  of  mineralogy.  But  superstitious  preju- 
dice, would  crucify  Innovation,  though  it  were  com- 
missioned only  to  take  from  it  the  instruments  of  in- 
Toluntary  suicide. 

Heterodoxy  and  Infidelity  are  terms  scarcely  lees 
familiar  than  the  names  of  our  household  goods.  And 
yet,  they  ought  never  to  have  commanded  the  respect 
of  an  interpretation.  They  are  epithets,  that  Igno- 
rance, long  ago,  malicious!)'  appended  to  imaginary 
offenses,  against  imaginary  authority. 

In  the  purest  theological  sense,  the  Grecian  Socra- 
tes, the  probable  prototype  of  the  reputed  author  of 
Christianity,  was  a  heretic,  in  opposing,  by  the  mos* 
conclusive  arguments,  the  settled  superstitions  of  hia 
time  and  country.  And  if  it  were  well,  that  he  was 
sacrificed  to  the  eyeless,  conceited  and  obstinate  ge-- 
nius  of  stability,  whilst  attempting  to  eradicate  a  mis- 
chievous and  senseless  mythology;  tjien  it  was  justi- 
fiable to  crucify  the  reputed  Son  of  God  for  attempting 
a  similar  innovation.  Nor  should  a  reproach  res: 
upon  the  consistent  obstinacy  of  the  descendants  of 
Abraham,  though  they  had  really  murdered  the  Savior 
of  the  world.  For  it  matters  not,  by  whom  good  or 
eyil  la  perpetrated,  whether  by  demigod  qr  diabolist. 


24  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

The  visionary  Plato,  whose  theological  cogitations, 
with  very  little  revision,  have  been  adopted  by  more 
than  eighty  generations,  as  the  genuine  oracles  of  Al- 
mighty God,  was  also  a  heretic:  And,  as  a  disturber 
of  the  public  peace — an  innovator  upon  established 
opinion,  should  have  been  early  treated  to  a  bowl  of 
the  lethean  beverage,  which  had  already  made  his  tu- 
tor, Socrates,  sleep  so  soundly,  beneath  a  nation's  au- 
dible regret,  for  so  mischievious  and  diabolical  a 
homicide. 

Copernicus  too,  who  brought  forth  from  a  chaos  of 
fallacies,  an  astronomical  system,  apparently  too  deep 
for  human  cogitation;  whereon  he  stood  so  far  above 
coternporary  humanity,  that  he  must  have  seemed,  at 
that  dark  day,  somewhat  like  an  unearthly  spirit,  sent 
down  to  put  these  vagrant  worlds  in  order,  was,  for 
this,  condemned  and  excommunicated  by  the  Romish 
Church,  as  a  heretic  and  vilifier  of  the  word  of  God. 
Nor  did  that  Church  acquire  sufficient  shame  of  its 
former  godliness,  to  annul  its  worse  than  Irish  bull 
against  the  philosopher,  until  1821,  or  little  less  than 
three  hundred  years.  A  very  short  time,  indeed,  for 
Bigotry  to  relent,  or  Superstition  to  be  enlightened. 
Or,  to  utter  a  very  plain  truth,  this  almost  superhu- 
man philosopher,  to  whom  the  world  is  more  deeply 
indebted  than  any  acknowledgment  can  reach,  waa 
persecuted  and  finally  outlawed,  by  a  church,  that  ar- 
rogated to  itself  both  the  wisdom  and  justice  of  God, 
for  propagating  opinions,  which  are,  at  present,  so 
well  and  generally  understood  to  be  true,  that  an  im- 
pugner  of  them,  would  be  a  butt  fbr  childish  ridicule. 


TaEOLO3ICll,   CRITICISMS.  55 

Did  Galileo  persist  in  scrutinizing  Nature,  until  she 
deigned  to  repay  his  importunity  with  disclosures,  she 
had  hitherto  denied  to  the  most  devoted  of  her  admi- 
rers? Was  not  this  incontinence  to  God,  the  Church 
and  Stability,  a  deeper  heresy  than  common  men 
could  perpetrate:1  So  thought  the  Church,  and  there- 
fore ordered  its  inquisitors  to  torture  out  the  culprit'* 
recantation,  or  his  life!  Did  his  firmness  fail  him,  in 
this  desperate  contest  between  his  principles  and  his 
fears?  And  did  he  yield,  in  base  hypocrisy,  to  the 
clamor  of  the  last,  and  humbly  bend  before  the  sym- 
boi'tof  a  fiction,  and  forswear  himself  upon  the  repu- 
ted oracles  of  God?  And  did  shame  for  his  duplicity, 
and  compunction  for  what  he  deemed  the  basest  sacri- 
lege, goad  up  his  manhood  to  a  contradiction  of  his 
oath,  at  the  hazard  of  interminable  imprisonment,  to 
which  he  was  immediately  sentenced? 

And  was  it  right  that  such  men's  and  indeed  any 
men's  opinions,  that  happened  to  be  inappreciable  by 
the  stupidity  of  the  time,  should  subject  them  to 
death,  unlimited  imprisonment  or  excommunication, 
another  name  for  outlawry,  by  which  life  was  left  at 
the  disposal  of  any  bigoted,  ferocious  villain,  who 
•hould  choose  to  talte  it?  Then  Paul  and  Stephen 
met  justice  in  their  deaths,  and  all  were  bound  to 
sanction  it  with  a  hearty  amen.  Nor  should  a  Zuin- 
glius,  a  Luther,  a  Calvin,  a  Kn  ox,,  with  interminable 
and  so  forths,  have  escaped  the  hand  of  the  execu- 
tioner. And  yet  they  lived  to  see  the  Romish  Harlot 
ahorn  of  many  of  her  most  seductive  fascinations, 
and  discarded  by  numerous,  enthusiastic  admirers; 

9 


t<  TH10L03IC1L    CHITICISMI. 

And  finally,  to  bequeath  their  names  to  ProtesUnt 
Christendom,  as  objects  of  a  superstitious  and  shame- 
ful idolatry. 

Thus  much  for  the  irresponsibility  of  opinion,  and 
the  universal,  reciprocal  right,  and  incalculable  utilitj 
of  its  promulgation. 

The  following  remarks  wiri  be  more  particularly 
appropriate;!  to  the  questions  ofthe  origin,  and  primi- 
tive character,  of  man. 

i'here  are,  of  the  present  generation  of  men,  nu- 
merous, sincere  worshipers  of  antiquity,  and  still 
more,  pious  venerators  of  the  fallacies  of  the  oldem 
time;  for  whom  I  feel  much  more  respect  than  for 
the  stupid  fancies  by  which  they  are  distinguished. 

Numerous  hypotheses  have  been  instituted  in  expli- 
cation ofthe  origin  of  mankind,  which  have  betn 
mostly  stamped,,  not  only,  widi  a  characteristic  falll- 
bilitv,  but  with  the  most  palpable  and  disgraceful  fu- 
tility. 

•That  man  originally  vegetated,  or  sprang  up  spon- 
taneously from  the  soil,  deriving  nourishment  from 
the  earth,  by  means  of  fibrous  appendages  of  histoe* 
\igers,  until  his  progressive  organism  enabkd 
him  to  extricate  hi m.se if  from  his  maternal  attach- 
ment.-, and  henceforth  to  commence  a  life  of  inde- 
pendent, voluntary  exertion,  is  a  theory  scarcely  plau- 
sible enough  to  secure  its  ijnmediate  and  general 
adoption.  Nor  is  it  jnucli  more  plausible,  that  our 
primitive  ancestor  was  a  chattering  baboon,  whom 
progressive  cultivation  succeeded,  at  length,  in  trans- 
forming ta  a  human  being.  And,  were  it  true,  it 


TDCEOEOGICJL    CRITICISM!.  37 

nevertheless  fail  to  afford  a  satisfactory  solu- 
tion of  our  problem.  The  same  difficulty  would  rent 
with  the  question,  whence  came  the  baboon/ 

And  when  we  contemplate  the  Mosaic  account  of 
the  same  phenomenon,  in  the  light  of  modern  philoso- 
phy, it  seems  but  little  better  than  an  unnatural  aggre- 
gation of  uncomely  protuberances,  whose  deformity 
ihould  not  escape  the  superficial  scrutiny  of  child- 
hood. And  however  thankless,  it  may  not  be  alto- 
gether unprofitable,  to  spend  a  few  crnicis/ris  upo« 
ibis  very  popular  hypothesis. 

The  reader  of  the  Mosaic  account  finds,  that  "  in 
the  beginning,  God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth. " 
Although  this  is  a  reputed  specimen  of  divine  revela- 
tion, it  would  seem,  that  no  extraordinary,  human  in- 
genuity were  required  for  the  attainment  of  so  sim- 
ple a  reflection.  Fatuity  itself  would  scarcely  have 
overlooked  the  necessity  of  the  earth's  existence,  an- 
tecedently to  that  of  its  products.  This  text  might 
therefore  escape  a  formal  criticism,  but  for  its  illegiti- 
mate connexions,  and  a  question  it  involves  about 
which  the  world  has  already  expended  a  great  deal  of 
nncaudid  altercation,  viz.,  whether  God  created  th« 
material  of  the  world,  or  that  he  merely  formed  it  out 
of  a  material  already  existing?  There  would  aeem 
to  bo  nothing  further  required  for  the  satisfactory  dis- 
posal of  this  question,  than  that  the  inquirer  should 
make  an  effort  to  attain  the  idea  of  something  having 
been  made  out  of  nothing;  and  that  he  shall  cease  bi» 
importunity  until  he  shall  hare  succeeded  in  the  at- 
tempt. v 


tS  VBEOL.OGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

The  connections  referred  to,  demand  a  rnoreeerictif 
examination.  Revelation  declares,  that  "  the  earth 
was  without  form  and  void."  And  wherefore  should 
God  have  thus  created  it?  Is  it  a  plausible  suggestion, 
that  God  should  have  created  a  formless  world,  in  or- 
der to  display  his  ingenuity  in  remodeling  it?  Thi« 
would  hardly  be  admitted  as  a  specimen  of  ordinary, 
human  wisdom.  Is  it  not  then  a  better  interpretation 
of  the  text,  that  God  formed,  out  of  the  materials  al- 
ready existing  in  a  chaotic  state,  the  system  of  things 
as  it  at  present  exists?  It  certainly  appears  thus  to 
me. 

Again.  <l  And  darkness  was  upon  the  face  of  tha 
deep.  And  the  spirit  of  God  moved  upon  the  face  of 
the  waters."  This  being  relieved  of  its  tautology 
would  read  thus.  And  darkness  was  upon  the  face  of 
the  deep;  and  the  spirit  of  God  moved  thereon:  For 
doubtless,  in  this  text,  deep  and  waters  are  synony- 
mous terms.  The  purpose,  for  which  the  spirit  of 
God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters,  seems  not  to 
have  been  considered  important,  or  not  well  under- 
stood, by  the  revelator,  else  he  would,  most  likely, 
have  noticed  it.  The  expression  may  possibly  con'- 
tain  more  poetry  than  truth;  which  however  ia  quits 
unessential. 

There  appears  to  be  no  little  difficulty  in  appre- 
hending what  waters  were  referred  to  in  the  text  un- 
der consideration,  since  the  elements  are  represented 
to  have  been  in  a  state  of  chaos,  or  confusion,  until 
the  second  day,  when  "  God  said  let  there  be  a  firma- 
ment, in  the  midst  of  the  waters,  and  let  it  divide  th« 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  JJ 

waters  from  the  waters,"  which  was  accordingly 
done;  "and  the  waters  which  were  under  the  firma- 
ment were  divided  from  those  which  were  above  the 
firmament."  "And  God  called  the  firmament  Heaven." 

It  may  be  well,  here,  to  examine  the  facts  referred 
to  in  the  foregoing  quotation.  And  firstly  of  the  fir- 
mament, which  divided  the  upper  and  nether  waters, 
and  must,  therefore  have  been  a  material  partition, 
*et  up  in  the  atmosphere,  at  a  specific  distance  from 
the  surface  of  the  earth. 

Ask  of  the  children  in  the  street,  who  have  been  * 
dozen  years  under  a  kind  and  intelligent  guardianshipi 
what  they  understand  of  the  firmament,  or  sky, 
and  they  will  doubtless  answer,  that  it  is  an  imaginary- 
concavity,  whose  radius,  or  semi-diameter,  is  measured 
by  the  extent  of  individual  vision;  and  that  it  is,  there- 
fore, nothing  but  a  mere  distance  in  space,  and  that 
too  as  different  as  is  the  capacity  of  different  eyes. 
Now  if  God  made  the  firmament,  such  as  we  under- 
stand it  to  be,  he  was  certainly,  for  once,  most  un- 
profitably  employed;  that  is,  in  making  nothing. 

A  gain  jit  may  be  asked,  what  waters  were  above  thi* 
ideal  firmament;  and  for  what  purpose  were  they  re- 
served? These  same  children  would  unhesitatingly 
answer  you,  that  there  is  no  humidity  of  the  atmos- 
phere, at  any  hight,  but  what  is  derived  from  the  wa- 
ters of  the  earth  by  the  process  of  evaporation;  and 
hence  that  the  firmament,  were  it  ever  so  real  and 
•ubstaniial,  could  not  have  been  designed  for  the  pur- 
pose, the  revelator  has  imputed  to  it;  so  that  whatever 
other  knowledge  Inspiration  had  afforded  him,  it  h»4 


SO  THBOL.OQICAL    CRITICISMS 

left  him  totally  ignorant  of  the  subjects  of  his  rerel*> 
t^on. 

We  find  that  on  the  third  day  of  creation,  "  God 
said,  Let  the  waters  under  the  heaven  he  gathered 
together,  unto  one  place,  and  let  the  dry  land  appear." 
"And  God  called  the  dry  land  earth;  and  the  gather- 
ing together  of  the  waters  called  he  seas." 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  that  gravitation  is  not  » 
principle  inherent  in  matter,  but  was  instituted  for  the 
especial  purpose  of  making  water  run  down  hill,  ia 
order  that  it  should  be  accumulated  in  the  superficial 
hollows  of  the  earth.  And  with  this  principle  atao^ 
the  revelator  seems  not  to  have  been  very  well  ac- 
quainted. 

This  divine  record  also  informs  us  that,  upon  th« 
fourth  day  of  creation,  God  made  the  sun,  rnoon  and 
•tars,  and  set  them  in  the  firmament,  to  give  light 
upon  the  earth;  to  rule  over  the  day  and  over  ih« 
night;  and  to  divide  the  light  from  the  darkness. 

Criticism  finds  no  lack  of  food  in  this  relation,  t« 
»«t  its  teeth  upon. 

We  find  in  'the  commencement  of  creation,  that 
God  created  light,  and  that  it  was  good;  that  he  diri- 
ded  it  from  the  darkness,  and  called  the  light  day,  and 
the  darkness  night ;  and  that  the  evening  and  th« 
morning  were  the  first  day.  Three  days,  therefore, 
or  as  most,  learned  theologians  will  have  it,  thre« 
•pochs  of  a  thousand  years  each,  transpired  before 
these  planetary  luminaries  were  created.  Now,  it 
would  seem,  since  these  were  understood  by  infinite 
Wisdom  to  be  indispensable  to  the  system  of  wbioii 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.,  51 

tfac  earth  is  a  very  insignificant  component,  that  h* 
would  have  practiced  the  economy  of  providing  them 
in  season,  to  have  answered  his  earliest  purpose.  And 
to  corroborate  this  suggestion,  it  is  proverbial  that  th« 
strictest  economy  is  observed  in  all  the  operations  of 
Nature.  'Hence  the  apparent  singularity,  that  .God 
should  havre  wasted  a. single  effort  of  almighty  power, 
as  the  above  circumstance  would  indicate. 

Geological  researches  have  already  raised  many  se- 
rious doubts,  amongst  the  educated,  both  clergy  and 
laity,  whether  these  great,  Mosaic,  creative,  terres- 
trial phenomena,  absolutely  and  successively  trans- 
pired, in  the  short  space  of  one  hundred  and  forty-four 
hours,  or  six  days;  and  there  ore  attempt  to  obviate 
their  embarrassment,  by  the  futile,  if  not  contempti- 
ble, hypothesis,  that  those  days  were  geological  eras, 
pr  periods  of,  at  least,  a  .thousand  years  each.  By 
this  expedient  they  have  created  a  dilemma,  that  af- 
fords the  theological  wiseacre,  the  amplest  opportu- 
nity, for  the  display  of  his  sophistical  jugglery.  For, 
consonant  with  this  dogma,  the  whole  vegetable  king- 
dom must  not  only  have  subsisted,  during  a  thousand 
years,  without  the  invigorating,  and  at  present  indis- 
pensable influence  of  sun-light,  but  without  any  light 
at  all,  during  the  somewhat  protracted  night  of  fiv« 
hundred  years.  This  is  a  bone  for  ^him  to  gnavr, 
whose  nien,tal  hunger  has  made  him  desperate. 

I  would  be  allowed  a  word  more  in  addition  to  a 
foregoing  remark  upon  the  firmament,  whiph  God 
Jiimself  declared  to  be  Heaven,  or  the  revelator  wan 
grossly  mistaken.  For  it  is  thus  written,  in  the  eighth 


It  THEOLOGICAL,    CRITICISMS. 

verso  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis:  "And  God 
called  the  firmament  Heaven."  This  appears  to  be  a 
definition  of  heaven,  that  spiritualists  have  entirety 
overlooked,  or  flagitiously  neglected,  in  the  construc- 
tion of  their  systems;  and  apparently  involves  them 
in  an  inextricable  dilemma. 

If  Moses  has  not  misrepresented  God,  nor  God 
misapprehended  his  subject,  heaven  is  a  nullity.  For, 
as  has  been  already  suggested,  modern  science  has 
demonstrated  the  firmament  to  be  only  the  termina- 
tion of  vision,  in  an  unobstructed  atmosphere.  Henco 
it  should  have  constituted  an  article,  in  every  creed 
of  spiritualism,  that  the  only  heaven  God  has  reared, 
is  built  of  man's  imagination. 

Whenever  the  subject  shall  have  been  fairly  exam- 
ined, it  may  be  reasonably  anticipated,  that  the  idea* 
associated  with  heaven  and  hell,  originated  in  a  total 
ignorance  of  astronomical  facts. 

During  several  thousand  years  of  human  history, 
the  earth  was  supposed  to  be  circular,  and  as  fiat  as  a 
trencher,  but  of  very  uncertain  thickness;  overwhich 
was  erected  a  substantial  canopy  or  firmament,  thai 
covered  its  upper  or  habitable  surface,,  like  a  tent,  of 
which  Josephus,  the  interpreter  of  the  Jewish  scrip- 
tures, thus  writes,  more  than  half  a  century  after  the 
commencement  of  the  Christian  era  :  "  He  (God) 
also  placed  a  crystaline  firmament  round  it,  and  put 
it  together  in  a  manner  agreeable  to  the  earth,  and  fit- 
ted it  for  giving  moisture  and  rain,  and  for  affording 
the  advantage  of  dews."  This  is  an  explicit  avowal 
of  the  opinion,  that  rains  and  dews  were  transmitted 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

by  the  firmament,  from  a  fountain  of  water  sustained 
upon  its  upper  surface.  And  whilst  you  deem  this 
opinion  too  futile  for  grown-up  children  ever  to  have 
adopted,  let  me  tell  you  that  it  was  no  less  judicious 
than  most  of  the  philosophic  opinions  of  the  great 
Lord  Bacon,  nearly  sixteen  hundred  years  after. 

Notwithstanding  the  unavoidable  admission  of  u 
deep  and  gloomy  cavern  beneath  the  earth,  it  remained 
entirely  unappropriated,  to  any  human  purpose,  until 
the  doctrine  of  spiritualism,  or  the  soul's  immortality 
and  accountability,  was  instituted  in  Greece,  about 
four  hundred  years  before  the  Christian  era,  when  it 
was  converted  into  a  residence  for  the  disembodied 
spirits  of  unjust  men,  and  denominated  ades  or  hades, 
iu  the  English  translation  hell,  and  doubtless  a  cor- 
ruption of  the  Hebrew  hull,  a  word  denoting  infirmi- 
ty, pain,  misery,  &.c, 

On  the  contrary,  the  imaginary  region  above  the 
firmament,  was  supposed  to  be  constantly  illuminated, 
with  an  atmosphere  of  light  and  odor,  especially 
adapted  to  the  felicity  of  God,  and  the  spirits*  of  just 
men. 

Now  you  have  no  difficulty  in  apprehending  the  en- 
tire fallacy  of  these  ancient  opinions;  nor  the  utter 
absurdity  of  respecting,  or  even  retaining,  terms, 
which  science  has  rendered,  not  merely  ambiguous, 
but  absolutely  nugatory. 

It  has  been  long  since  demonstrated  th^t,  with  re- 
spect to  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  nothing  is  per- 
manently above  or  below  them;  but  erery  thing  both, 
In  a  series  of  diurnal  succession.  Hence  the  express* 

4 


34  THBOLOQICAL    CRITICISMS. 

ions,  ao  familiar  with  Theology,  Heaven  above  and 
Hell  beneath,  possess  too  little  meaning,  to  be  at  all 
impaired  by  a  direct  transposition. 

Again.  "And  God  set  them  (the  sun  moon  and 
stars)  in  the  firmament,"  &c. 

It  is  unnecessary  that  you  should  be  reminded  of 
the  gross,  astronomical  ignorance,  indicated  by  this 
expression.  You  are  aware  that,  as  very  accurately 
computed,  the  distance  of  the  sun  from  the  earth  is 
ninety-fire  million  of  miles,  nearly,  and  that  the 
laoon,  though  nearest  to  the  earth  of  any  of  the  plan- 
etary bodies,  revolves  at  a  mean  distance  of  two  hun- 
dred and  thirty-seven  thousand  miles.  Now,  to  say 
nothing  of  the  distance  of  the  fixed  stars,  which  is 
altogether  too  great  for  trigonometry  to  compute,  it 
must  be  a  very  transparent  material,  of  which  the 
Mosaic  firmament  was  composed,  to  transmit  light, 
with  the  splendor  of  the  sun,  a  distance  equal  to  that 
between  the  sun  and  the  moon's  orbit,  or  forty-four 
million  seren  hundred  and  sixty-three  thousand  miles. 
And  if  it  would  take  a  ball,  as  fired  from  a  cannon, 
twenty-six  years  to  reach  the  sun,  and  it  is  thus  com- 
puted, it  would  be  a  tedious  time,  in  a  drouth,  before 
we  should  be  drenched  from  such  a  distance,  beside 
the  danger  to  all  living  organism  from  the  velocity  a 
rain-drop  would  have  acquired  in  such  a  descent. 

Omitting  any  further  remarks  upon  the  manner  in 
which  the  human  race  was  primitively  introduced 
upon  the  earth,  a  subject,  upon  which  speculation 
may,  as  abortively  exhaust  itself,  as  upon  a  literal 
and  substantial  Trinity,  we  will  pass  on  to  the  princi- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISM*.  55 

pal  subject  of  our  discourse,  or  the  primitive  state  of 
man  as  revealed  in  the  following  text,  Gen.  1.  27. 
**  So  God  created  man  in  his  own  image:  in  the  image 
of  God  created  he  him;  male  and  female  created  he 
them." 

Here  the  questions  very  forcibly  obtrude  themselves : 
In  what  respect  did  man  resemble  his  maker?  Whether 
in  his  physical,  or  intellectual  character,  or  both? 

If  we  admit  the  accuracy  of  the  Mosaic  account  of 
God,  we  are  constrained  to  admit  his  very  near  re- 
temblance  to  humanity,  and  that  not  of  the  most  ex- 
alted character. 

That  he  was  corporeal  and  organized,  is  most  clear- 
ly deducible  from  the  physical  phenomena  it  is  said 
he  performed,  such  as  seeing,  hearing,  talking,  walk- 
ing &c.  And  that  his  intellect  resembled  man's,  is  no 
less  clearly  deducible,  from  numerous  instances  of  its 
imbecility,  of  which  notice  will  be  taken  as  they  suc- 
cessively occur.  But  if  Adam  and  Eve,  as  they  are 
represented  to  have  been  at  their  creation,  really  re- 
sembled God,  his  worship  must  be  somewhat  humili- 
ating to  rational  creatures. 

If  we  should  forego  our  criticisms  of  the,  appa- 
rently, inevitable  embarrassments,  attending  the  ad- 
mission that  God  is  a  physical  being,  which,  most 
certainly,  with  respect  to  the  attribute  of  omnipres- 
ence, must  occasion,  either  from  his  bulk  or  bustle, 
very  serious  inconvenieuce  to  the  existence,  or  har- 
mony, of  his  creation,  and  contemplate  his  intellectual 
and  moral  character,  as  represented  by  our  first  pa- 
rents, we  can  scacrely  charge  a  dissent  from  his  wor- 


36  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

ship,  as  an  unpardonable  sacrilege,  or  even  an  Unrea- 
sonable neglect.  The  innocence  of  the  primitive  pair 
JB  made  to  depend  upon  their  ignorance,  which  pro- 
hibited their  knowing  good  from  evil.  And  yet  they 
were  in  possession  of  propensities,  for  whose  direc- 
tion, knowledge  or  instinct  was  indispensable,  as  the 
reputed  catastrophe  sufficient!}-  proves.  Their  curi- 
osity and  credulity  were  also  proportioned  to  their 
innocence,  whereby  they  were  ruinously  imposed  up- 
on by  the  misrepresentation  of  a  snake.  Nowr,  you 
would  not,  deliberately,  recognize  these,  as  consistent 
attributes  of  a  God,  notwithstanding  Hebrew  igno- 
rance shall  have  thus  described  them:  You  would 
doubtless  sooner  distrust  it  as  a  fable;  and  as  having 
originated  with  some  human  egotist,  who  thought  so 
smartly  of  himself,  that,  therefore,  God  would  choose 
to  be  like  him. 

Subsequently,  we  read,  *c  And  God  said.  Behold  I 
have  given  you  every  herb  bearing  seed,  which  is  up- 
on the  face  of  all  the  earth,  and  every  tree,  in  which 
is  the  fruit  of  a  tree  yielding  seed,  to  you  it  shall  bo 
for  meat."  Query.  Did  original  transgression  so 
strangely  modify  the  constitution  and  principle  of 
both  animal  and  vegetable  nature,  that  a  thousand 
articles  designed  for  nutrition,  should  thus  become 
dangerous  and  fatal  poisons?  Or  is  it  not  more  likely 
to  be  a  specimen  of  the  ignorance  of  that  early  time? 

With  these  very  liberal  criticisms  of  the  first  chap- 
ter of  Genesis,  we  will  pass  to  the  second,  wherein 
are  several  propositions,  upon  which  a  generous  crit- 
icism may  be  profitably  exercised. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

And  I  hope  you  will  think  my  claim  to  your  indul- 
gence justifiable,  while  I  continue  to  examine  tho 
Mosaic  evidences  of  the  primitive  character  of  man, 
that  being  our  subject,  and  this  its  most  popular  his- 
tory. 

In  the  first  verse,  \ve  read,  "  Thus  the  heavens  and 
the  earth  were  finished,"  &c.  Man  having  been 
made  as  the  last  labor  of  the  six  day's  creation,  both 
male  and  female.  And  in  the  second  verse  it  is  de- 
clared that  God  rested  from  all  his  work  of  creation, 
upon  the  seventh  day,  which  he  blessed  and  sancti- 
fied. Hence  it  must  be  settled,  if  our  text  is  true, 
that  nothing  has  been  subseqently  created.  Omitting 
all  counter  geological  circumstances,  the  following 
difficulty  is,  nevertheless,  to  be  in  some  manner  obvi- 
ated, in  order  to  leave  the  subject  as  clear  as  divine 
revelation  ought  to  be. 

We  find  it  repeated  in  verse  7,  That  the  Lord  God 
formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  &.C.,  and  that 
he  subsequently  planted  the  garden  of  Eden;  and  took 
the  man  and  put  him  therein,  to  dress  and  keep  it— •- 
meanwhile  prohibiting  the  eating  of  the  tree  of 
knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  which  was  equivalent  to 
saying,  He  should  continue  forever  in  his  state  of  in- 
fantile ignorance,  or  purchase  knowledge  at  the  ex- 
pense of  a  terrible^  retribution.  Or  in  other  words, 
that  he  should  either  be  a  fool  or  be  damned.  After 
this,  as  in  verse  19,  God  indulged, his  curiosity,  by 
bringing  all  the  creatures  he  had  made  unto  Adam  to 
see  what  he  would  call  them.  And  Adam  gave  to 
these  many  thousands  their  several  appropriate  Dames. 


S3  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

And  this  ceremony  of  passing  so  many  creatures  in  re- 
view before  Adam,  must  have  occupied  no  little  time. 

The  poor  man  was  nevertheless  thus  far,  a  bachel- 
or. And  perhaps  some  suspicious  persons  may  doubt 
whether  he  did  not  afterwards  repent,  that  he  had  not 
tontinued  so.  After  all  this,  however,  God  manufac- 
tured Eve  from  one  of  Adam's  ribs.  The  difficulty 
therefore  is  in  reconciling  the  fact  of  the  entire  crea- 
tion having  been  accomplished  in  six  days,  including 
man,  both  male  and  female,  and  yet  that  the  first  wo- 
man was  not  made  until  a  long  time  afterward,  at 
least  until  the  eighth  day,  leaving  a  Sabbath  interval, 
or  era,  as  modern  theology  will  have  it,  of  a  thousand 
years:  By  which  time  Adam  could  not  have  been  at 
all  too  young  to  marry,  nor  yet  too  little  childish  to 
refrain. 

Omitting  several  circumstances  recorded  in  this 
chapter,  which  are  not  particularly  relevant  to  our 
present  subject,  to  which  however  I  shall  immediate- 
ly recur,  1  will  pass  it,  with  a  single  remark  upon  the 
last  verse,  which  declares  that  they  were  both  naked, 
the  man  and  his  wife,  and  were  not  ashamed,  show- 
ing, conclusively,  that  modesty  is  not  instinctive,  but 
merely  social,  or  conventional,  with  our  species.  And 
thus  it  seems  to  be  with  every  moral  virtue.  Igno- 
rance, although  it  may  afford  excuse  for  wrong,  does 
not  insure,  nor  is  itself,  a  virtue.  But  on  the  contrary 
it  may  well  be  called  the  mother  of  all  moral  mis- 
chief, as  is  clearly  proved  by  the  catastrophe  it  is  said 
to  have  early  wrought  with  human  nature. 

We  are  told,  in  the  commencement  of  the  succeed- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  39 

ing  chapter,  that  the  serpent  was,  not  only,  the  most 
subtle  of  the  beasts,  (a  very  sing  rar  classification  of 
the  reptile)  but  that,  (more  singular  still)  he  talked 
familiarly  in  human  dialect;  and  although  truly  one 
of  God's  good  creatures, 

With  infidel  temerity,  gave  God  the  lie; 

And  swore  that  Eve  might  eat  the  fruit,  nor  surely  die: 

And  thus  succeeded  with  an  ignorance  and  inexperi- 
ence, that  God  must  have,  purposely,  prepared  for 
the  occasion,  since  omniscience  could  not  have  misap- 
prehended the  result,  nor  the  circumstances  upon 
which  it  depended.  It  must  have  been  a  most  singu- 
lar state  of  things,  when  snakes  knew  more  than 
folks !  And  yet  the  case  was  so,  or  this  reputed  reve- 
lation is  a  fable.  In  either  case  my  point  is  gained: 
That  is,  to  show  the  ignorance  of  primeval  manhood; 
which  must  have  been  extreme,  if  Moses  told  the 
truth.  Or,  if  the  story  is  a  fable,  it  shows  still  more; 
viz.  That  ages  of  observation,  experience  and  human 
intercourse  were  wasted  upon  our  stupid  race:  For 
surely  the  inconsistencies,  fallacies  and  even  absurdi- 
ties of  this  Mosaic  history,  leave  no  room  to  doubt, 
that  the  writer,  in  comparison  with  a  common  clown 
of  the  present  time,  was  verily  a  blockhead.  And  if, 
meantime,  the  wisest  of  his  species,  no  doubt  his  an- 
cestors, and  may  be  his  cotemporaries,  knew  less  than 
Makes. 

To  corroborate  this,  apparently,  severe  remark,  a 
few  brief  additional  references  will  be  presented,  in- 
cluding some  of  the  omissions  we  have  made  in  chap- 
ter second. 


40  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS, 

In  the  third  chapter  and  fourth  verse,  it  is  thua 
written:  "  And  the  serpent  said  unto  the  woman,  Ye 
shall  not  surely  die." 

Now,  at  the  time,  when  the  prohibition  of  the  fruit 
was  communicated,  (and  we  do  not  read  that  it  ever 
was  repeated,)  Eve  was  not  abstracted  from  the  costal 
furniture  of  her  intended  spouse,  and  therefore  must 
have  learned  of  him,  or  the  lying  serpent,  all  she 
knew  of  God's  especial  interdiction. 

But  suppose  Adam  to  have  been  God's  messenger 
to  his  wife,  of  which,  however,  no  hint  is  given,  the 
problem  must  have  been  still,  with  her,  whether  Ad- 
orn or  the  serpent  told  the  truth.  And  if  it  were  sup- 
po.-able,  that  Adam  could,  thus  early,  have  abused 
the  confidence  of  his  better  half,  as  grossly  as  the 
after  custom  has,  too  often,  been,  had  Eve  believed 
the  serpent,  or  the  devil,  sooner  than  her  spouse,  she 
scarcely  could  have  been  culpable. 

We  find  the  following  declaration,  chap.  2.  v.  5  &. 
6.  "  For  the  Lord  God  had  not  caused  it  to  rain  up- 
on the  earth,  and  there  was  not  a  man  to  till  the 
ground."  But  there  went  up  a  mist  from  the  earth, 
and  watered  the  whole  face  of  the  ground."  And 
then  God  planted  the  garden  of  Eden,  having,  v.  7, 
just  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and 
breathed  into  him  the  breath  of  life,  &,c.  The  earth 
therefore  had  not  been  watered  from  the  time  that 
the  seas  were  formed,  viz.,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
third  day,  and  at  the  close  of  which,  vegetation  had 
occurred,  "  and  God  saw  that  it  was  good.  Here  the 
question  very  naturally  presents  itself,  How  long  had 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  41 

this  drouth  continued  antecedently  to  the  mist  above 
referred  to  ?  And  how  should  vegetation  have  been 
thence  affected?  Vegetation  is  declared  to  have  oc- 
curred upon  the  third  day,  or  the  same  in  which  the 
waters  were  drained  from  the  more  elevated  portions 
of  the  earth;  and  whereon  the  dry  land  first  appeared 
after  its  creation.  Now  if  the  rnist  occurred,  as  it 
seems  to  have  done,  to  promote  vegetation  in  the 
garden  where  Adam  was  to  be  immediately  placed,  it 
must  have  been  upon,  or  after,  the  sixth  day 'of  crea- 
tion. And  one  of  the  two  interpretations  must  be 
admitted  as  applicable  to  this  strange  relation.  Ei- 
their  this  interval  consisted,  according  to  any  plausi- 
ble interpretation,  of  some  three  revolutions  of  the 
earth  upon  its  axis,  or  about  72  hours,  or  of  three 
geological  eras  of  a  thousand  years  each,  which  cer- 
tainly would  be  no  slight  consideration  in  the  case  in 
question.  For  admitting  that  God  made  the  earth 
out  of  nothing,  it  seems  to  have  consisted  of  a  mis- 
cellaneous admixture  of  its  constituent  elements  du- 
ring one  or  two  of  these  periodical  revolutions  at 
least,  and  was  entirely  corered  with  water  until  the 
third,  leaving,  as  above  remarked,  three  other  revo- 
lutions, up  to  the  creation  of  man.  Now  if  these 
revolutions,  days  or  epochs,  consisted  of  twenty-four 
hours  each,  or  seventy-two  in  the  whole,  the  earth 
having  been  so  lately  and  thoroughly  drenched,  could 
scarcely  suffer  from  a  drouth  so  soon,  nor  other  than 
aquatic  vegetables  thrive  lustily.  And  on  the  other 
hand,  if  those  eras  were  each  a  thousand  years,  an^J 

5 


42  THEOLOGICAL   CBITICISMS. 

a  drouth  had  lasted  during  three  of  them,  it  seems  ft 
moisture  would  have  been  difficultly  raised  from  such 
a  parched  and  desert  surface. 

And  then,  a  moisture  taken  from  the  earth,  could 
do  no  more  by  its  return,  than  to  supply  the  loss  it 
must  have  first  occasioned.  And,  if  this  process 
were  necessary  in  Eden,  already  watered  by  the 
sources  of  four  of  the  largest  rivers  in  the  world,  a 
general  barrenness  must  have  destructively  prevailed; 
and  have  rendered  a  new*  creation  indispensable,  un- 
less Nature  were  possessed  of  the  power  of  procre- 
ation, which  seems  to  be  clearly  though  strangely  in- 
sinuated in  the  fifth  verse  of  the  chapter  we  are  con- 
sidering; and  upon  which  we  shall  hereafter  raore 
particularly  remark. 

"  And  a  river  went  out  of  Eden,  to  water  the  gar- 
den; and  from  thence  it  parted  and  became  into  four 
heads."  Here  we  find  ourselves  embarrassed  by  the 
lollowing  queries.  If  the  river  went  out  of  Eden,  to 
water  the  garden,  could  the  garden,  nevertheless, 
huve  been  in  Eden,  as  it  is  declared  to  have  been,  in 
a  preceding  verse  of  the  same  chapter?  And  if  not, 
at  what  distance  and  in  what  country  east  of  that 
imaginary  one,  denominated  Eden,  was  it  most  likely 
situated?  Or  was  it  located  only  in  the  imagination 
of  the  writer?  And  again.  How  are  we  to  under- 
stand the  declaration,  that  the  river  of  Eden  parted 
mto  four  heads  as  it  passed  onward,  consistently  with 
our  present  notions  of  that  subject?  It  is  certainly, 
mn  ordinary  occurrence,  that  a  stream  should  divide 
iuelf  into  four  larger  ones,  which  this  must  have 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  '1 

done,  if  there  is  any  meaning  to  the  reputed  revela- 
tion. The  only  rivers  to  which  this  text  can  hav« 
any  consistent  allusion,  are  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris, 
nor  do  they  form  a  junction  until  one  of  them  ha* 
traversed  a  distance  of  nearly  fourteen  hundred 
miles.  At  this  junction,  however,  theologians  hav« 
thought  fit  to  place  the  fictitious  Eden,  together  with 
the  two  additional,  fictitious  rivers. 

It  may  not  be  amiss,  to  enquire  also,  how  it  hap- 
pened that  Eve,  in  her  reputed  ignorance,  should 
have  so  highly  appreciated  the  knowledge  of  good 
and  evil,  or  that  Gods  were  happier  than  men,  as  that 
it  should  have  become  a  motive  to  such  preposterous 
disobedience.  And  the  serpent  not  having  told  her, 
that  wisdom  was  worth  possessing,  how  very  singular 
that  she  should  have  had  a  desire  for  it! 

But  the  fruit  was  eaten,  and  their  eyes  were  opened 
to  a  recognition  of  their  nakedness.  And  wherefore? 
Was  it  because  the  nakedness,  in  which  God  had 
placed  them,  was  an  evil,  a  sin,  or  shame?  Then  it 
seems  that  God  should  have  earlier  supplied  them 
with  garments  of  skins,  from  his  own  manufactory; 
as  we  are  informed  he  afterwards  did,  when  they 
had,  however,  already  learned  to  manufacture  for 
themselves,  and  were  therefore  in  less  need  of  his  as- 
sistance. Another  query  very  naturally  arises: — 
Whether  the  formal  communication  between  God  and 
his  creatures,  was  consistent  with  any  rational  idea  of 
the  Creator  of  the  Universe?  Or  was  it  not  rather 
indicative  of  human  childishness;  or,  at  least,  an  ig- 
norance of  which  children  should  now  be  ashamed? 


44  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

In  the  curse  pronounced  upon  the  serpent,  there  is 
a  problem  of  no  very  easy  solution,  viz:  What  sort 
of  locomotion  did  the  serpent  perform;  and  by  what 
sort  of  apparatus  was  it  effected,  previous  to  the  exe*- 
cution  of  the  curse  ?  And  wherefore,  was  the  serpent 
cursed,  for  saying  what  he  could  not  have  known  was 
false,  unless  he  were  omniscient,  or  most  unreasona- 
bly familiar  with  his  maker  for  such  a  lying,  traitor- 
ous reprobate.  But  what  would  seem  the  oddest  part 
of  this  most  singular  narration  is,  that  this  infernal 
reptile,  having  much  more  wit  than  man,  and  hence 
much  moro  responsibility,  and  having  also  most  dia- 
bolically seduced  God's  favorites,  to  a  willful  disobe- 
dience of  his  positive  command,  and  thus  transferred 
his  only  hope  and  heritage,  interminably,  to  the  devil, 
should  have  been  merely  sentenced  to  that  peculiar 
mode  of  locomotion,  to  which  his  organism  had  al- 
ready inevitably  doomed  him;  and  that  he  should 
thenceforth  subsist,  exclusively,  upon  a  diet  which  he 
has  never  eaten,  but  which  was  aueiently  believed  to 
be  mostly,  if  not  entirely,  the  creature's  subsistence: 
And  had  the  writer  of  the  revelation  known,  that 
gnakes  have  none,  or  moveless  eyelids,  he  would, 
doubtless,  have  made  their  winkless  eyes  an  item  of 
the  curse. 

We  see  that  this  transgression  wrought  strangely 
with  both  the  Deity  and  his  works,  eliciting  a  curse, 
that  changed  the  state  and  character  of  creation. 
Why  not  indulge  the  query  then,  wherefore  God 
should  not  have  hindered  the  transgression,  apparent- 
ly so  easily  performed,  rather  than  have  wasted  »o 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  45 

much  almighty  skill,  in  remodeling  his  affairs,  and  in 
finally  obviating,  at  the  halves,  the  eternal  consequen- 
ces of  one  poor,  ignorant  man's  delinquency? 

It  seems  to  have  been  no  small  mistake  of  the  di- 
vine revelator,  that  he  contemplated  labor  as  a  curse; 
whilst  it  doubtless  contributes,  aside  from  its  pecuni- 
ary attainments,  much  more  than  all  things  else,  to 
human  health  and  happiness.  The  very  necessity 
too,  which  the  fall  is  said  to  have  engendered,  is  the 
sole  circumstance,  upon  which  the  development  of 
man's  physical  and  intellectual  energies  depend.  But 
for  this,  he  would  never  have  emerged  from  the  le- 
thean  gtupidity — the  slough  of  barbarism,  in  which 
he  must  have  been  originally  immersed. 

"  And  the  Lord  God  said,  Behold  the  man  is  be- 
come as  one  of  us,  to  know  good  and  evil."  In  this 
particular  therefore,  man  was  not  made  in  the  like- 
ness of  God;  but,  by  a  most  heinous  transgress- 
ion, he  unluckily  attained  it.  And  lest  he  should  par- 
take of  the  tree  of  life  &c.  he  was  driven  out  of  the 
garden,  whose  entrance  was  subsequently  defended 
by  a  much  more  miraculous  process,  than  to  have  cor- 
rupted the  fruit,  and  blasted  the  tree,  for  which  the 
miracle  was  instituted. 

Thus  have  I  adverted  to  some  of  the  evidences  af- 
forded by  the  three  first  chapters  of  the  Pentateuch, 
of  the  characteristic  ignorance  and  imbecility  of  the 
early  specimens  of  our  race.  Nor  should  it  be 
deemed  discourteous,  that  Josephus  calls  his  ancien* 
brethren  savages.  For  so,  without  a  doubt,  they 
were;  nor  thus  unlike  all  human  nature,  unwhipped, 
unschooled  by  long,  calamitous  experience. 


46  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS, 

I  am  aware,  that  the  slight  criticisms  I  have  made 
upon  the  Bible,  will  work  my  serious  disparagement, 
with  all  its  superstitious  votaries,  who  shall  have 
learned  the  fact.  And  yet  I  have  the  temerity  to  pur- 
Bue  and  propagate  them,  carefully  and  fearlessly  to 
ihe  last  recorded  fantasm  of  the  Christian  revelator: 
And  for  the  sole  purpose  of  eliciting  and  reciproca- 
ting truth  and  its  legitimate  deductions,  upon  a  sub- 
ject which  hitherto,  has  seemed  to  cost  a  great  deal 
more  than  it  has  been  worth.  In  this  however  I 
know  my  liability  to  mistake;  and  will  therefore  in- 
vite all  counter  criticism,  and  make  my  frank  ac- 
knowledgment, for  every  fallacy  my  opponem  shall 
detect  me  in.  Nor  should  he,  with  all  his  faith  in 
revelation,  be  frightened  at  a  snarling  human  criti- 
cism; but  breathe  with  still  more  freedom,  as  he  feels 
that  truth  will  thus  be  more  clearly  and  abundantly 
elicited.  If  God  or  Nature  owns  theology  as  true, 
imbecile  man  will  no  less  vainly,  seek  its  controver- 
sion,  than  he  will  his  own  best  good  in  practicing  li- 
centiousness. And  if  it  is  a  fiction,  however  brilliant- 
ly illusive  in  the  gloom,  it  will,  nevertheless,  like  an 
ignis  faluus,  allure  its  votary  from  the  plain,  direct 
and  safe  highway,  wherein  right  reason  charges  man 
to  prosecute  his  earthly  journey,  and  leave  him  to  in- 
numerable annoyances,  he  might  otherwise  avoid. 

Had  our  race  pursued,  for  eighteen  hundred  years, 
a  fearless,  vigilant  and  unprejudiced  search  for  the 
truths  of  Nature,  instead  of  spiritual  phantoms,  it 
might  now,  with  some  good  show  of  plausibility  deny 
its  reputed  primicve  consanguinity  with  the  ape. 


. 

I 


LECTURE  II. 

THE  PRIMITIVE  AND  PROGRESSIVE  CHARACTER  OP  MAff. 

Not  having  had  sufficient  opportunity,  upon  a  for- 
mer occasion,  to  finish  my  remarks,  upon  the  primi- 
tive character  of  man,  which  I  had  adopted  as  the 
subject  of  my  discourse,  I  am  constrained,  at  this 
time,  to  solicit  your  attention  to  a  few  additional  ones. 

History,  both  sacred  and  profane,  explicitly  declares 
the  primitive  state  of  man,  whenever  and  wherever 
he  has  been  thus  found,  to  have  been  one  of  degraded, 
savage  ignorance  and  ferocity.  Nor  could  it  have 
been  otherwise,  unless  he  were,  once,  supernaturally 
endowed  with  what  he  now  acquires  by  study  and 
experience.  And  this  is  a  subject,  we  hope  to  live, 
hereafter,  to  discuss. 

In  addition  to  the  testimony  afforded  us,  by  naviga- 
tors, travelers  and  missionaries,  from  the  renowned 
Christopher  Columbus  downward,  of  the  ignorance, 
barbarism,  and  even  cannibalism  of  the  natives  of 
our  own  continent,  and  of  the  numerous  islands  of  the 
Pacific  ocean,  which  ought  to  afford  satisfactory  cor- 
roboration  of  our  remark,  we  have  abundant  other, 


48  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

more  ancient  and  perhaps  more  satisfactory  historical 
evidence,  that  we  can  conveniently  adduce,  to  th* 
same  point. 

England,  or  more  anciently,  Britain,  or  Albion, 
when  first  visited  by  the  Romans,  about  half  a  centu- 
ry before  the  Christian  era,  was  inhabited  by  a  race 
of  savages,  either  naked,  or  but  partly  clothed  with 
the  skins  of  beasts,  the  earliest  kind  of  covering,  next 
to  fig-leaves,  ever  adopted  by  our  species,  and  in  the 
case  of  our  first  parents,  as  has  been  before  alluded 
to,  manufactured  by  God  himself,  they  being  known, 
or  supposed  to  be,  incapable  of  doing  it  themselves. 
These  savage  islanders  were  divided  into  numerous 
petty  tribes,  each  being  governed  by  a  chief  of  its 
own  electing,  under  whose  direction  they  were,  more 
or  less  of  them,  almost  unremittingly  engaged  in  fero- 
cious and  exterminating  conflicts.  They  were  hunt- 
ers, or  roving  herdsmen,  without  any  knowledge  of 
agriculture;  and  debased  by  the  most  absurd  and 
Druidical  superstition;  in  whose  rites,  scores  of  hu- 
man beings  were  offered  at  a  time,  in  their  diabolical 
sacrifice  to  an  imaginary  God.  And  these  pagan,  un- 
clad deer-hunters — these  literal  cannibals  of  nineteen 
hundred  years  ago,  were  the  lineal  ancestors  of  the 
present  demigods  of  the  cliff-bound  isle,  whose  litera- 
ry fallacies  we  are  fain  to  mouth;  and  whose  fashion- 
able absurdities  we  aspire  to  imitate.  Nor  does  his- 
tory speak  better  of  the  early  character  of  their  con- 
tinental neighbors,  than  of  themselves.  And  that, 
even,  God's  reputed  favorites,  the  Jews,  were  once 
in  the  same  predicament,  as  other  uncultivated  eava- 


THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISM*.  49 

is  evident,  not  only  from  the  testimony  of  ih» 
Jewish  historian,  but  from  the  infallible  source  of  dn 
vine  revelation,  wherein  we  find,  that  they,  though 
coder  God's  especial  guidance  and  instruction,  tr«r» 
oo  less  Pagans,  Polytheists,  and  detestable  desecratorp 
of  both  Reason  and  Justice,  in  the  particular  of  hu- 
man sacrifice,  than  any  of  those  Gentile  infidelfl, 
whom  God  so  deeply  cursed  for  Hebrew  benefit.  Did 
Dot  Rachel  steal  her  father's  household  gods,  and  sub- 
sequently escape  detection,  by  a  much  less  hone&t 
than  ingenious  artifice,  although  that  would  scarcely 
hare  succeeded  with  a  Catholic  inquisitor?  Did  nor 
the  idolatry  of  his  brethren  so  enrage  the  godly  leader 
of  the  Jewish  Exodus,  that  he  brake  the  graven  ta- 
blets of  his  God;  nor  knew,  that  such  an  invaluable 
bequest  would  be  repeated.  Does  not  each  Hebrew 
record,  from  Genesis  to  Chronicles,  inclusive,  declare 
idolatry  to  have  been  the  crying,  and  almost  unreoail- 
ted  sin  of  God's  elected  nation,  for  more  than  eleven 
hundred  years?  The  Hebrews,  then,  form  no  ex- 
ception to  the  rule,  that  savages  are  idolaters.  And 
have  you  heard  it  from  the  sacred  desk,  as  all,  moat 
•urely,  should  have  done;  nor  so  seldom  either,  &• 
that  it  shall  have  been  forgotten,  that  this  peculiar, 
pious  people  believed  that  God  was  pleased  with  hu- 
man sacrifice,  a  sign  of  deepest  moral  degradation? 
However  careful  Theology  has  been  to  let  this  ques- 
tion rest,  without  a  comment,  or  a  breath  so  free,  ft* 
that  it  might  awake  the  sleeping  dragon,  there  stands 
a  witness  of  its  own,  amidst  its  treasured  oracle* « 
that  says,  emphatically!  the  thing  is  truel 

I 


50  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

devoted,"  (for  sacrifice)  "  which  shall  be  devoted  of 
men,  shall  be  redeemed;  but  shall  surely  be  put  to 
death.'1  Thus  we  find,  that  one  of  the  ordinances 
that  God  imposed  upon  ibe  Levites,  or  holy  priest- 
hood, was  to  sacrifice  human  beings  under  certain  cir- 
cumstances, without  the  right  of  redemption  at  anj 
rate  whatever.  And  if  corroboration  is  demanded, 
we  will  refer  you  to  the  fulfillment  of  Jeptha's  vow, 
in  which  he  promised  the  Lord,  if  he  succeeded  in 
his  invasion  of  the  Ammonites,  that  whatsoever  came 
forth  of  the  doors  of  his  house  to  meet  himr  on  his 
return,  should  be  consecrated  to  Him,  and  offered  up 
for  a  burnt  offering.  We  think  that  Incredulity  it- 
self, would  be  ashamed  to  demand  further  corrobora- 
tion  of  the  truth  of  our  remark.  And  to  leave  no 
doubt  of  a  Hebrew  Polytheism,  or  that  religion  which 
includes  a  catalogue  of  inferior  deities,  or  subordinate 
Sods,  you  have  only  to  avail  yourselves  of  a  single 
fact,  viz:  That  their  language  includes  a  nomencla- 
ture, of  the  kind  in  question,  amongst  which  are  the 
following:  Elihorepb,  God  of  winter  or  of  youth; 
Eliashib,  God  of  conversion;  Elijah,  God  of  strength; 
Eliphalet,  God  of  deliverance;  Elisha,  God  of  salva- 
tion; Eiishah,  God  of  help;  Elmodam,  God  of  mea- 
iure;  Ishmael,  God  that  hears;  Tabeal,  God  of  good- 
ness; Uriel,  God  of  fire.  Ajraiu  we  have  the  follow- 
ing, wherein  father  is  synonymous  with  God,  viz: 
Abidah,  Father  of  knowledge;  Abidan,  Father  of 
judgment;  Abiezer,  Father  of  help;  Abihail,  Father 
of  strength;  Abijam,  Father  of  the  sea  ;  Abilene, 
Father  of  mourning,  or  of  grief;  Abiuadab,  Father 


of  willingness;  Abinoam,  Father  of  beauty;  Abisha- 
lom,  Father  of  Pence;  Abishua,  Father  of  salvation; 
Abishur,  Father  of  uprightness;  Abital,  Father  of 
the  dew;  Abitub,  Father  of  goodness;  Abiud,  Father 
of  praise;  Abncr,  Father  of  light;  Absalom,  Father 
of  Peace.  Again,  Baal-perazhn,  God  of  divisions; 
Baal-zebub,  God  of  the  fly,  &c. 

Here  we  close  our  evidence  of  the  primitive  burtm- 
rism  of  the  human  race,  which  we   think   should  b* 
satisfactorily  received  hy  any  candid  enquirer. 
14  The  proper  study  of  mankind,  is  man!" 

So  wrote  the   poetic   philosopher,   Alexander   Pop<% 
whose  works  have  successfully  defied  the  most  labo- 
rious attempts  at  emulation,  for  more  than  a  hundred 
years.     And  yet  we  venture  to  suggest,  that  the  study 
of  man  would  be  too  limited  and  monotomous  to  com- 
pensate the  trouble  of  its  prosecution,  were  it  not  as- 
sociated  with   that   of  other  numerous   phenomena, 
with  which  he  stands  in  a  more  or  less  intimate   r«la- 
tion.     The  proper  study  of  mankind   seems,   there- 
fore, that  of  the  phenomena  of  nature,    where  man 
belongs,   and  where  he  rightfully  claims  precedence. 
Nature  is  to   be   contemplated,    as   a  magnificent 
work-shop,   wherein  a  few   primitive    principles  arc 
enabled,  by  indefinite  modification,  to  produce  the  in- 
numerable, and  interminably  t'i versified   phenomena 
of  the  material  world;  which  phenomena  in  the  char- 
acter of  so  many  transformations  of  the  matter  of  th« 
universe,  clearly  illustrate,  that  its  parts  are  in  a  per- 
petual state  of  action  and  reaction  upon   each   other. 
And,  strange  as  it  may  appear,  it  is  becoming  $.  qufp.- 


48  TBEOtOCIClJ.   CRITICISMS. 

don  of  no  inconsiderable  interest  and  plausibility, 
among  the  simplifiers  of  science,  whether  electricity, 
variously  modified  by  successive  and  peculiar  cir- 
cumstances, is  not  the  exclusive  principle,  upon  which 
all  the  phenomena,  or  changes  of  Nature,  depend,  h 
would  be,  doubtless,  premature,  however,  to  eettlt 
this  question  either  way,  at  present.  At  any  rate, 
corroborative  facts  ought  to  be  much  more  abundantly 
accumulated,  before  the  affirmative  of  this  proposi- 
tion can  be  safely  adopted,  as  a  valid  corollary  of 
physical  science. 

It  is  true  that  Nature,  with  all  her  infinitude  of  r*« 
•ources,  is,  nevertheless,  economical  of  her  princi- 
ples and  expenditures;  squandering  nothing  by  io- 
adaptness,  inadequacy,  or  superfluous  multiplication 
of  causes:  And  whatever  number  of  laws  she  has  in- 
stituted, their  simplicity  has  been  a  subject  of  agreea- 
ble surprise,  to  all  who  have,  fortunately  discovered 
them. 

As  spectators  of  Nature's  phenomena,  our  vision 
with  all  its  artificial  aid,  is  comparatively  limited  to 
a  roere  point;  and  yet  that  point  is  much  too  pregnant 
with  variety,  for  man's  successful  inquisition.  For 
what  is  all  our  pictured  firmament,  though  its  radius 
were  measured  by  a  Herschel's  telescope,  compared 
with  worlds  interminably  piled  on  worlds?  And  then 
again,  each  drop,  of  yon  transparent,  rippling  brook, 
though  but  a  mimic  world,  is,  notwithstanding, 
crowded  with  a  countless,  living  population  that  de- 
fies no  less  our  vulgar  scrutiny,  than  does  the  nature 
«f  th«  laws  that  formed  it. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITIC18MB.  M 

What  then,  must  be  the  insignificance  of  individual, 
yea  of  aggregate,  humanity,  in  attempting  to  direct 
or  modify  the  phenomena  of  an  infinite  creation,  or 
«ven  to  apprehend  the  intrinsic  character  of  the  law* 
that  govern  them? 

Human  imbecility  is  more  than  proverbial,  whe»- 
6rer  it  is  employed  upon  a  subject  as  magnificent  an 
Nature's  greatest,  or  as  intricate  as  her  minutest  pro- 
ducts. Nor  less  than  thus,  whenever  it  would  invade 
the  recess  of  ultimate  causality. 

But  it  would  seem,  that  Nature  intended  to  com- 
pensate for  the  barrenness  of  our  discrimination,  by 
the  fertility  of  our  imaginations;  thereby  enabling  UB, 
with  all  desired  facility,  to  transport  ourselves,  from 
this  matter-of-fact  world  of  disagreeable  realities,  to 
an  imaginary  one,  fruitful  of  the  happiest  fictions. 

However  imbecile  are  the  human  powers,  or  how* 
ever  circumscribed  is  the  theater  of  human  enterprise, 
there  are,  nevertheless,  many  circumstances,  with 
which  man  may,  and  should,  become  acquainted:  Nor 
are  they  rendered  unimportant,  by  an  insignificance 
disproportion^  to  his  own.  They  are  well  adapted 
to  his  situation  and  capacity:  Nor  has  Nature  or- 
dained a  phenomenon,  that  is  not  emphatically  great, 
to  little  man.  Yes;  so  great  is  the  least,  that  Nature 
ever  deigned  to  present,  that  it  is  intrinsically,  and  in 
its  ultimatum,  as  incomprehensible  as  infinity  itself. 
It  is  not,  therefore,  with  ultimate  principles  nor  pri- 
mary states  of  matter,  that  human  cognizance  has  to 
do:  They  are  indefinitely  removed  beyond  the  limits 
of  finite  scrutiny;  and  are  known  only  as  deductions 


14  THBOLOaiCAL    CRITICISMS. 

from  secondary  phenomena:  And  these  arc  the  cir- 
cumstances that  occupy  exclusively,  the  whole  field 
of  human  observation;  and  constitute  the  only  mate- 
rials of  human  knowledge. 

All  genuine  science,  therefore,  consists  in  a  knowl- 
edge of  specific  and  comparative  facts,  and  inferences 
legitimately  deduced  therefrom;  and  hence  can  be  ac- 
quired in  no  other  manner,  than  by  observation  and 
reflection.  Nor  can  the  latter  be  exercised,  but-  upon 
tho  materials  already  provided  by  the  former.  And 
in  this  circumstance  is  to  be  formed  a  solution  of  the 
problem  of  the  tardy  progress  of  intellectual  im- 
provement. Nothing  promises  greater  indulgence  of 
human  curiosity  than  literary  antiquarianism;  nor 
anything  more  gratifying  to  the  literary  speculator, 
than  a  concise,  but  judiciously  compiled  history  of 
the  progress  of  human  knowledge  from  its  primitive 
barbarism  to  its  highest,  present  elevation  :  Nor 
should  it  be  doubted,  that  a  competent  genius  could 
not  be  more  usefully  and  profitably  employed,  than 
upon  such  an  enterprise.  And  you  will  permit  me  to 
express  my  regret,  at  the  want  of  both  talents  and 
opportunity,  to  afford  you  more  than  a  few  miscella- 
neous hints  upon  this  voluminous  and  interesting  sub- 
ject. 

Whatever  vacillation  science  may  have  suffered 
during  several  thousand  years,  or  however  differently 
It  may  have  advanced  with  different  nations,  and  nt 
different  times,  it  is  not  deducible  from  any  authentic, 
historical  record,  that  it  had  ever  attained  a  higher 
elevation  than  at  the  time,  and  by  the  contributions  of 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISES.  Si 

the  proverbially  great  Sir  Francis  Bacon,  whose  time 
commenced  the  era  of  .renovated  science — the  resusci- 
tation of  a  long  smothered  genius,  that  Bigotry  had 
hitherto,  for  sixteen  hundred  years,  securely  immersed 
in  the  Stygian  element,  until  its. long  unslruggling  si- 
lence, attested  to  its  dissolution.  And  Superstition, 
Bigotry  and,  the  Church,  blessed  the  God  of  obsti- 
oate,  ignorant  Stability  fur  so  great  and  happy  a  de- 
liverance. But  thoir  joy  was  turned  to  sorrowing, 
when  they  found  that  Genius  had  been  only  sleeping. 
Whatever  we  may  be  called  to  do  upon  another  oc- 
casion, wo  will  confine  our  remarks,  at  present,  to 
the  question  of  comparative  difference  between  tha 
present  state  of  natural,  or  physical  science,  and  that 
of  the  time  of  Lord  Bacon,  of  whom  you  have  all 
heard  much  and  often. ^Hc  has  been  represented,  and 
no  doubt  truly,  as  the  wonder  and  disgrace  of  his 
ageA-the  precocious  philosopher,  who  in  the  sixteenth 
year  of  his  childhood,  ventured  upon  the  invalidation 
of  the  fallacies  of  the  Aristofliun  philosophy,  which 
for  near  two  thousand  years,  had  held  unqualified 
dominion  over  the  scientific  opinions  of  mankind — a 
literary  Hercules,  who  had  the  temerity  to  beard  the 
peripatetic  Lion  in  his  den — -the  man  of  universal  ge- 
nius, and  indefatigable  industry,  who  wrote  volumi- 
nously upon  history,  law,  medicine,  theology,  physi- 
cal and  metaphysical  philosophy,  geology,  mineralo- 
gy, agriculture,  horticulture,  witchcraft  and  magic. 
"And  here  we  stop,  to  introduce,  to  your  notice,  A 
few  specimens  of  this  intellectual  prodigy,  of  the. 
olden  time. 


id  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

Speaking  of  the  spontaneous  elimination  of  salt, 
from  sea-water,  he  says,  vol.  1,  p  240,  of  his  worki, 
in  10  vols.,  London,  1800,  that  he  has  little  doubt, 
"that  the  very  dashing  of  the  water  thatcometh  from 
the  sea,  is  more  proper  to  strike  off  the  salt  part,  thaa 
when  the  water  slideth  of  its  own  motion."  Thif 
•pecimen  affords  indubitable  evidence,  that  the  great 
Lord  Bacon  was  totally  ignorant  of  the  solvency  and 
raporability  of  water.  He  appears  not  to  har» 
known,  that  sea-water  is  but  fresh-water  holding  m 
•olution  more  or  less  common-salt,  or  muriate  of  §o- 
da;  which  is  elimenated  by  the  evaporation  of  th« 
•olvent,  and  aggregated,  into  more  or  less  perfect  cubic 
crystals.  But  this  is  knowledge,  so  familiar  to  all  of 
you,  that,  were  not  the  fact  most  veraciously  record- 
ed, you  would  seriously  doubt,  that  a  learned  man  of 
any  period,  could  have  been  so  grossly  ignorant. 
Again,  on  the  same  page,  speaking  of  the  percolation 
of  water  and  other  liquids,  through  cloth,  sand  and 
wood,  as  being  good  strainers  &c.,  he  says:  "Th» 
gum  of  trees,  which  we  see  to  be  commonly  shining 
and  clear,  is  but  a  fine  passage,  or  straining  of  the 
juice  of  the  tree,  through  the  wood  and  bark;  and  in 
like  manner,  cornish  diamonds,  and  rock  rubies, 
which  are  yet  more  resplendent  than  gums,  are  the 
6ne  exudations  of  stone." 

What  backwoodsman — what  aboriginal  forestef 
could  have  displayed  a  profounder  ignorance,  upon 
these  subjects,  than  has  this  great  scholar  of  the  eer- 
<mteenth  century  ?  Did  he  know,  as  children  now  do, 
that  vegetable  gums  are  the  product  of  glandular 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS,  5J 

secretion  in  vegetables,  no  less  than  gall  and  urine 
are  in  animals;  or  that  crystals  cannot  result  from  the 
percolation  of  sap  or  other  liquid  through  an  imper- 
meable, inorganic  rock?  And  these  were  the  very- 
gems  of  science,  when  Sir  Francis  Bacon  was  a  prodi- 
gy of  learning. 

I  am  aware,  that  I  ought  not  to  waste  this  opportu- 
nity in  quoting  nonsense,  even,  from  the  highest  au- 
thority; but  I  cannot  resist  the  temptation,  to  present 
you  with  a  few  more  specimens  from  this  fountain  of 
literary  absurdity,  which  was,  for  a  long  time,  es- 
teemed the  quintessence  of  abstract  philosophy. 

Upon  the  subject  of  temperature,  my  Lord  Bacon 
says,  p  270,  "  The  producing  of  cold  is  very  worthy 
the  inquisition,  both  for  the  use,  and  disclosure  of 
causes:  For  heat  and  cold  are  Nature's  two  hands, 
whereby  she  chiefly  workcth;  and  heat  we  have,  in 
readiness,  in  respect  of  the  fire;  but  for  cold,  we 
must  stay  till  it  cometh,  or  seek  it  in  deep  caves,  or 
upon  high  mountains:  And  when  all  is  done,  we  can- 
not obtain  it,  in  any  great  degree;  for  furnaces  of  fire 
are  far  hotter  than  a  summer's  sun;  but  vaults  or  hills 
are  not  much  colder  than  a  winter's  frost,"  And  of 
the  means  of  producing  cold,  "  the  first  is  that  which 
Nature  presenteth  us  withal:  viz.  the  expiring  of  cold 
out  of  the  inward  parts  of  the  earth,  in  winter,  when 
the  iun  hath  no  power  to  overcome  it;  the  earth  be- 
ing, aa  hath  been  said  by  some,  primum  frigidum," 
or  originally  cold.  "  The  second  cause  of  cold  is  the 
contact  of  cold  bodies;  for  cold  is  active  and  transi- 
tive, into  bodies  adjacent,  as  well  as  heat,  which  in 

7 


»6  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

seen,  in  those  things,  that  are  touched  with  snow  or 
cold  water.  The  third  cause  is  the  primary  nature 
of  all  tangible  bodies;  for  it  is  well  to  be  noted,  that 
all  things,  whatsoever,  tangible,  are  of  themselves 
cold,  except  they  have  an  accessory  heat,  by  fire,  life 
or  motion :  For  even  the  spirit  of  wine,  or  chemical 
oils,  which  are  so  hot  in  operation,  are  to  the  first 
touch  cold.  The  fourth  cause  is  the  density  of  the 
body;  for  all  dense  bodies  are  colder  than  most  other 
bodies,  as  metals,  stone,  glass;  and  they  are  longer  in 
heating  than  softer  bodies.  And  it  is  certain,  that 
earths  dense,  tangible  hold  all  the  nature  of  cold. 
The  cause  is,  for  that  all  matters  tangible  being  cold, 
it  must  needs  follow,  that  when  the  matter  is  most 
congregate,  the  cold  is  the  greater.  The  fifth  cause 
of  cold,  or  rather  of  increase  and  vehemency  of  cold 
is  a  quick  spirit,  inclosed  in  a  cold  body;  as  will  ap- 
pear to  any,  that  shall  attentively  consider  of  nature, 
in  many  instances.  We  see  nitre,  which  hath  a  quick 
spirit,  is  cold,  more  cold  to  the  tongue,  than  stone; 
»o  water  is  colder  than  oil,  because  it  hath  a  quicker 
apirit — and  snow  is  colder  than  water,  because  it  hath 
more  spirit  within  it.  So  we  see,  that  salt  put  to  ice, 
ns  in  the  producing  of  artificial  ice,  increaseth  the  ac- 
tivity of  cold.  So  some  insects  which  have  spirit  of 
life,  as  snakes  and  silkworms,  are,  to  the  touch,  cold; 
so  quicksilver,  (or  metallic  mercury,)  is  the  coldest 
of  rnetals,  because  it  is  fullest  of  spirit.  The  sixth 
cause  of  cold  is  the  chasing  and  driving  away  of 
•pirits,  such  as  have  some  degree  of  heat;  for  the 
banishing  of  the  heat  must  needs  leave  anybody  cold. 


THSdLOOlClL    CRITICISMS.  69 

This  we  see*  in  the  operation  of  opium  and  stupe- 
factives,  upon  the  spirits  of  living  creatures;  and  it 
were  not  amiss,  to  try  opium,  by  laying  it  upon  the 
top  of  a  weather-glass,  to  see  whether  it  will  contract 
the  air:  But  I  doubt  it  will  not  succeed;  for  beside 
that  the  virtue  of  opium  will  hardly  penetrate,  through 
such  a  body  as  glass,  I  conceive  that  opium  and  th* 
like,  make  the  spirits  fly  rather  by  malignity,  than  by 
cold."  Seventhly  and  lastly,  he  says,  "  the  same  ef- 
fect must  follow  upon  the  exhaling,  or  drawing  out 
of  the  warm  spirits,  that  doth  upon  the  flight  of  the 
spirits.  There  is  an  opinion,  that  the  moon  is  mag- 
uetical  of  heat,  as  the  sun  is  of  cold  and  moisture:  It 
were  not  amiss,  therefore,  to  try  it  with  warm  waters; 
the  one  exposed  to  the  beams  of  the  moon;  the  other 
with  some  screen  betwixt;  and  see  whether  the  former 
will  cool  sooner.'3 

It  should  be  entirely  unnecessary  for  me  to  point 
out,  to  you,  the  fallacies  of  this  long  quotation.  It  is 
altogether  impossible,  that  any  of  you,  for  whom  this 
discourse  was  prepared,  shall  misapprehend  them. 
You  cannot  have  evaded  the  conclusion,  that  thjs^ 
great  author  was  childishly  ignorant  of  the  nature  of 
heat,  or  caloric,  and  of  the  laws,  by  which  its  phe- 
nomena are  governed.  And  are  you  not  equally  im- 
pressed with  the  discrepancy  and  imbecility  of  his 
misinterpretations  ? 

You  have  not  forgotten,  that  his  fifth  cause  of  cold 
id  a  "  spirit,  enclosed  in  a  cold  body,"  and  that  he  in- 
stances the  cold  of  nitre,  or  nitrate  of  potash,  com- 
monly called  salt-pe-trre,  in  the  process  of  solution 


• 

60  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

upon  the  tongue,  in  confirmation.  How  clearly  thig 
example  illustrates  his  ignorance  of  a  principle,  that 
chemistry  has  long  since  elucidated,  viz.,  that  the 
transformation  of  a  solid,  to  a  liquid,  is  invariably  at- 
tended with  the  reduction  of  sensible  caloric,  which 
seems  to  have  been  absorbed  and  appropriated,  as  an 
indispensable  constituent  of  the  material,  in  its  statt 
of  transformation;  and  in  this  state,  wherein  it  is  in- 
capable of  affecting  the  thermometer,  or  of  being  de- 
tected by  the  touch,  it  is  denominated1  latent  heat;  of 
which,  it  is  little  less  than  discourtesy,  that  I  should 
•ay,  it  must,  necessarily,  be  derived  from  the  sur- 
rounding bodies,  and,  therefore,  in  the  case  in  ques- 
tion, from  the  tongue  itself,  thereby  reducing  the 
temperature,  and  consequently  occasioning  the  sensa- 
tion of  cold.  Nor  can  you  have  overlooked  the  sur- 
prising inconsistency  of  an  immediately  subsequent 
remark,  in  which  he  declares  the  sixth  cause  of  cold 
to  be  "the  chasing  and  driving  away  of  spirits,  such 
as  have  some  degree  of  heat."  What  a  farrago  of 
nonsense  have  we  here.  A  body  cold,  from  the  en- 
dowment of  a  cold  spirit — rendered  still  colder  by  tho 
abduction  of  a  hot  one,  between  which,  there  should 
have  been  represented  an  energetic  contest  for  maste- 
ry; and  this  would  have  afforded  a  single  cause  of 
heat,  altogether  more  plausible  and  efficient,  than  anj 
he  has  propounded  for  the  production  of  either  beat 
or  cold.  He  seems  to  have  known  nothing  of  the  ra- 
diation, reflection,  or  conduction  of  heat;  or  his  in- 
terpretations of  cold  (which,  by  the  by,  ia  nothing 
bnt  the  negation  of  heat,)  would  not  have  been  chat- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  61 

acterized  by  an  irrecoverable  decrepitude,  with  which, 
even,  crutches  are  unavailable.  Natural  Philosophy 
was  certainly  in  its  infancy,  when  it  recognized  cold, 
as  one  of  the  active  agencies  of  Nature ! 

A  few  moments  further  encroachment  upon  your  pa- 
tience will  have  ended  my  quotations,  for  the  present. 

Of  the  transmutation  of  bodies,  or  the  changing  of 
one  substance  into  another,  our  philosopher  says,  p 
$75,  "  It  is  very  probable,  as  hath  been  touched,  that 
that  which  will  turn  water  into  ice,  will,  likewise, 
turn  air,  some  degree  nearer,  into  water:  Therefore, 
try  the  experiment  of  the  artificial  turning  water  into 
ice,  whereof  we  shall  speak,  in  another  place,  with 
air  in  place  of  water,  and  the  ice  about  it.  And 
though  it  be  a  greater  alteration,  to  turn  air  into  wa- 
ter, than  water  into  ice,  yet  there  is  this  hope,  that, 
by  continuing  the  air  longer  time,  the  effect  will  fol- 
low." 

Lord  Bacon's  geological  notions  are  quite  too  ab- 
surdly curious  to  be  entirely  omitted  in  these  quota- 
tions. He  says,  of  the  induration  of  bodies,  "The 
examples,  taking  them,  promiscuously,  are  many,  an 
the  generation  of  stones  within  the  earth,  which,  at 
the  first,  are  but  rude  earth,  or  clay;  and  so  minerals, 
which  come,  no  doubt,  at  first  of  juices  concrete, 
which  afterwards  indurate  ;  also  the  exudation  of 
rock  diamonds  and  crystal,  which  harden  with  time." 
"  For  indurations  by  cold,  there  be  few  trials  of  it; 
for  we  have  no  strong  or  intense  cold  here,  on  the 
surface  of  the  earth,  so  near  the  beams  of  the  sun 
and  tfce  heavens.  The  likeliest  trial  is  by  snow  and 


62  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

ice;  for  as  snow  and  ice,  especially  being  hoi  pen,  and 
their  cold  activated  by  nitre  or  salt,  will  turn  water 
into  ice,  and  that  in  a  few  hours;  so  it  may  be,  it  will 
turn  wood  or  stiff  clay  into  stone,  in  longer  time." 
How  very  different  is  this  solution  from  the  modern 
geological  one,  viz.,  that  earth  is  formed  by  the  dis- 
gregation,  or  decay,  of  rocks,  which  detritus  or  sand 
being  washed  down  from  elevated  positions,  into  the 
depressions  or  excavations  of  the  earth's  surface,  ar« 
there  subjected  to  the  combined  influence  of  pressure 
and  volcanic  heat,  whereby  they  are  again  consolida- 
ted into  primitive,  solid  rock,  which,  being  subse- 
quently elevated  by  the  same  volcanic  power,  be- 
comes once  more  the  subject  of  another  revolution. 
Nor  did  the  English  philosopher,  appear  to  have, 
even,  dreamed,  that  the  stones  and  pebbles,  he  refers 
to,  were  once  aggregate  portions  of  mountain  rock, 
which  had  been  wrought  into  their  present  character 
by  the  tireless  operation  of  time  and  the  elements. 

Of  making  gold,  by  transmutation,  this  philosopher 
cays:  "  The  world  hath  been  much  abused  by  the 
opinion  of  making  gold:  The  work  itself  I  judge  to 
possible;  but  the  means  hitherto  propounded  to  effect 
it  are,  in  the  practice,  full  of  error  and  imposture; 
and,  in  the  theory,  full  of  unsound  imaginations." 
In  the  mean  time,  by  occasion  of  handling  the  ax- 
ioms, touching  maturation,  we  will  direct  a  trial 
touching  the  maturing  of  metals,  and  thereby  turning 
some  of  them  into  gold;  for  we  conceive  indeed,  that 
a  perfect  good  concoction,  or  digestion,  or  maturation 
of  some  metals,  will  produce  gold."  And  here  fol- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  C3 

lows  his  recipe,  for  that  invaluable  purpose,  via, 
"  Let  there  be  a  small  furnace  made  of  a  temperate 
heat;  let  the  heat  be  such,  as  may  keep  the  metal  per- 
petually molten,  and  no  more;  for  that,  above  all, 
purporteth  to  the  work.  For  the  material,  take  sil- 
rer,  which  is  the  metal  that,  in  nature,  symbolizeth 
most  with  gold;  put  in  also  with  the  silver,  a  tenth 
part  of  quicksilver,  and  a  twelfth  part  of  nitre,  by 
weight;  both  these  to  quicken  and  open  the  body  of 
the  metal;  and  so  let  the  work  be  continued,  by  the 
space  of  six  months,  at  the  least.  I .  wish  also  that 
there  be  at  some  times,  an  injection  of  some  oiled 
substance,  such  as  they  use  in  the  recovering  of  gold, 
which,  by  vexing  with  separations,  hath  been  made 
churlish;  and  this  is  to  lay  the  parts  more  close  and 
smooth,  which  is  the  main  work."  Alehimy,  I  need 
not  tell  you,  in  the  utmost  hight  of  its  phrensy,  never 
perpetrated  a  greater  absurdity  than  this. 

"  Putrefaction,"  he  says,  "  is  the  work  of  the  spir- 
its of  bodies,  which  are  ever  unquiet,  to  get  forth, 
and  congregate  with  the  air,  and  to  enjoy  the  sun- 
beams." Of  the  many  means,  he  enumerates,  to  in- 
duce and  accelerate  putrefaction,  "  the  eighth  is.  by 
the  releasing  of  the  spirits,  which,  before,  were  close 
kept,  by  the  solidness  of  their  coverture,  and  thereby 
their  appetite  of  issuing  checked;  as  in  the  artificial 
rusts  induced  by  strong  waters  (meaning  the  mineral 
acids)  in  iron,  lead  Sec.;  and,  therefore,  wetting  has- 
teneth  rust  or  putrefaction  of  any  thing,  because  it 
softeneth  the  crust,  for  the  spirits  to  come  forth." 
Again,  he  says,  of  the  conversion  of  oil  into  water, 


64  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

"  The  intention  of  version  of  water  into  a  more  oily 
•ubstance,  is  by  digestion;  for  oil  is  almost  nothing 
but  water  digested;  and  this  digestion  is  principally 
by  heat;  or  it  may  be  caused  by  the  mingling  of 
bodies,  already  oily  or  digested;  for  they  will  some- 
what communicate  their  nature  with  the  rest." 
Again,  upon  the  subject  of  vegetation,  he  says,  "  Th* 
ancients  have  affirmed,  that  there  are  some  herbs, 
that  grow  out  of  stone;  which  may  be,  for  that  it  is 
certain,  that  toads  have  been  found  in  the  middle  of 
freestone."  You  do  not  mistake  this  illustration  of 
the  most  preposterous  fallacy,  viz.,  that  our  philoso- 
pher seriously  believed  the  toads  referred  to,  to  hare 
been  generated,  nourished  and  matured  within  the 
enclosures  where  they  were  found,  f  Upon  the  subject 
of  atmospheric  impurities,  he  says,  "  It  was  observed 
in  the  great  plague  of  last  year,  that  there  were  seen, 
in  divers  ditches,  and  low  ground  about  London,  ma- 
ny toads,  that  had  tails  two  or  three  inches  long,  at 
the  least;  whereas  toads,  usually,  have  no  tails  at  all; 
which  argueth  a  great  disposition  to  putrefaction,  in 
the  soil  and  air."  Now  this  interpretation  of  a  fact, 
that  probably  never  existed,  and  seriously  promulga- 
ted as  an  important  item  of  natural  philosophy,  is  too 
contemptible,  even,  for  irony.  It  is  entirely  unwor- 
thy of  a  sneer.  J 

As  the  last  quotation,  with  which  I  will  trouble 
rou,  at  this  time,  I  will  present  you  one,  with  the 
following  very  curious  caption,  viz.  "Of  sweetness 
of  odor  from  the  rainbow."  "  It  hath  been  observed 
by  the  ancients,"  says  Lord  Bacon,  "that,  where  a 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  65 

rainbow  seemeth  to  hang  over,  or  to  touch,  there 
breatheth  forth  a  sweet  smell.  The  cause  is,  for  that 
this  happeneth  in  certain  matters,  which  have,  in 
themselves  some  sweetness,  which  the  gentle  dew  of 
the  rainbow,  doth  draw  forth,  and  the  like  do  soft 
showers;  for  they  also  make  the  ground  sweet:  But 
none  are  so  delicate,  as  the  rainbow,  where  it  falleth. 
It  may  be  also  that  the  water  itself  have  some  sweet- 
ness," Sec.  In  the  foregoing  quotations,  you  are  pre- 
sented with  adequate  means  to  enable  you  to  distin- 
guish with  satisfactory  precision,  the  difference  be- 
tween the  state  of  natural  science,  two  hundred  years 
ago,  and  at  the  present  time. 

You  see,  in  what  inexplicable  mystery,  the  most 
ordinary  phenomena  were  then  enveloped;  and  how 
extremely  fallacious,  were  the  reasoning  and  inter- 
pretations of  the  most  extraordinary  genius  of  any 
age  or  country.  But  with  these  palpable — these  pre- 
posterous fallacies,  Sir  Francis  Bacon  was  not  justly 
chargeable.  He  was  undeniably  an  intellectual  prodi- 
gy, who,  having  been  born  two  hundred  years  later, 
would  be,  at  this  moment,  the  predominant  star,  in 
the  world's  literary  firmament.  No!  it  was  not  Ba- 
con, but  the  times  in  which  Bacon  lived,  that  stultified 
an  intellect,  that,  to-day,  would  successfully  aspire  to 
universal  knowledge;  a  time  when,  for  more  than 
two  thousand  years,  Superstition  had  inextricably 
fastened  its  clogs,  upon  the  heels  of  Genius,  and  ef- 
fectually tied  up  Reason,  in  leading  strings. — A  long 
period  of  proverbial  literary  darkness,  which  Chris^ 
tianity  had  arbitrarily  hiforced  upon  manlumL  JDo 


£C  TEKOLOQICAL    GHITlCr3MS. 

not  mistake  me,  as  including,  in  my  ideas  of  supcr- 
itition,  the  most  fastidious,  moral  virtue;  but  treat 
me,  if  jou  will,  with  the  courtesy  of  recollecting  rny 
definition  of  it,  as  the  subject  of  future  criticism.  I 
define  superstition  to  be  a  religious  veneration,  for 
rrhat  cannot  be  examined  by  our  senses,  nor  legiti- 
mately deduced  by  our  reason:  And  if  this  definition 
i.s  exceptionable,  or  its  subject  justifiable,  they  are  in 
TOUT  possession,  together  with  my  premeditated 
promise  of  grateful  acknowledgement  for  amend- 
ment, or  refutation. 

I  am  conscious  of  having  hazarded  much,  with 
your  patience,  by  the  foregoing  series  of  quotation3 
and  unavoidable,  slightest  possible  comments,  but,  as 
I  hare  already  said,  I  could  not  forego  the  pleasure 
of  introducing  you  to  a  few  of  the  innumerable  gems 
that  sparkled  upon  the  pages  of  former  science.  Nor 
will  you,  carelessly,  mistake  the  character  of  the 
specimens,  with  which  you  have  been  presented. 
They  are  neither  the  stupid  yawnings  of  rusticity, 
nor  the  evaporations  of  a  brain,  steeped  in  the  bigot- 
ries of  the  time;  but  the  profoundest  cogitations  of 
the  profoundest  and  most  learned  of  men.  What, 
therefore,  must  have  been  the  character  of  Bacon's 
time  and  cotemporaries,  I  leave  to  the  fertility  of 
your  imaginations  to  interpret;  language  being  alto- 
gether inadequate  to  its  description. 

From  what  has  been  adduced,  you  are  doubtless 
fully  convinced  of  the  progressive  nature  of  human 
science; (and  that  the  knowledge  requisite  to  have 
made  a  wonderful  philosopher  of  two  centuries  ago, 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

is  scarcely  sufficient  to  make  a  respectable  clown  of' 
the  present  time.J  Nothing  has  been  stationary  with- 
in the  modifying  power  of  human  intellect:  And 
whatever  has  failed  to  participate  of  its  plastic 
emendations,  must  have  been  excluded  from  its  scru- 
tiny, or  have  been  too  incorporeal  for  successful  ex- 
amination. 

Could  the  spirits  of  the  ancients  be  aroused,  from 
their  protracted  slumber,  arid  awaked,  to  a  present 
and  a  retrospective  consciousness,  with  what  aston- 
ishment, would  they  look  upon  the  world's  metamor- 
phosis, since  they  left  its  bustling  theater? — With 
what  magic  influence,  would  the  countless  novelises, 
of  physical  science,  which  modern  genius  has  dug  out 
of  the  rubbish  of  former  times,  dance  before  their 
enchanted  vision?  And  do  you  contemplate  the  fu- 
ture, as  pronouncing  the  same  humiliating  sentence 
upon  us,  as  we  are  justly  pronouncing  upon  the 
past — that  the  proudest  intellectual  accomplishments 
of  to-day,  will,  in  a  few  fleeting  years,  be  stigmatized 
as  the  fooleries  of  antiquity?  I  venture  to  charge 
you  with  having  misapprehended  the  nature  of  the 
case,  or  the  testimony,  by  which  a  decision  should  be 
sustained.  The  cases  are  not  parallel,  in  the  circum- 
stances relevant  to  the  question. 

The  earliest  knowledge,  amongst  mankind,  must 
have  been  that  of  mere  animal  wants,  and  the  practi- 
cal manipulation,  subservient  to  their  indulgence. 
Their  enterprise  must  have  been  exclusively  directed 
to  the  attainment  of  sustenance,  and  personal  securi- 
ty; to  which  clothing  and  other  comforts,  and  fiualiy 


63  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

luxuries,  were,  doubtless,  successively  added.  Ne- 
cessity and  expediency  must  for  a  long  time,  with 
every  primitive  people,  have  formed  the  texts,  upon 
which,  their  entire  history  was  a  practical  commenta- 
ry. Abstract  science,  therefore,  must  have  been 
slow,  in  presenting,  and  still  slower  in  substantiating, 
its  claims,  upon  human  consideration:  And  what  is 
much  more  unlucky,  still,  is,  that  whatever  reflection 
was  appropriated,  without  the  pale  of  daily  necessi- 
ties, was  squandered  upon  the  whims  of  an  unculti- 
vated imagination.  Fancy  supplied  a  substitute  for 
facts,  which  prejudice,  or  imposture,  lost  no  time  in 
appropriating,  to  its  favorite  purposes:  And  hence, 
the  worst  of  all  literary  predicaments  followed,  viz: 
That  mankind  were  not  merely  ignorant,  and  there- 
fore, justly  supposed  to  be  teachable,  but  erroneously 
taught,  and  so  as  to  be  incorrigibly  certain  of  the  in- 
fallibility of  their  own  ignorance.  You  can  have  no 
difficult}r  in  apprehending  the  advantages  of  mere 
negative  knowledge,  over  fallacies,  laboriously  ac- 
quired. No!  you  need  not  be  told,  how  much  more 
irksome  is  the  task  of  unteaching  what  has  already 
been  mistaught,  than  of  teaching  what  has  not  been 
taught  at  all;  and  most,  who  have  been  either  teach- 
ers or  pupils,  are  doubtless  ready  to  yield  a  cheerful 
corroboration  of  the  fact. 

That  science,  even  in  Christendom,  was  mostly 
founded  upon  hypothesis,  for  sixteen  hundred  years, 
you  have  ample  testimony  in  the  quotations,  already 
presented  you,  from  the  works  of  Francis  Bacon,  to 
the  truth  of  which  every  page  of  literary  history 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  60 

offers  corroborative  testimony:  And  that  it  was,  du- 
ring the  same  period,  under  the  supervisorsbip  of 
guperstitiouists,  or  mistaught  individuals,  we  hare 
only  to  refer  to  the  biographies  of  such  men  as  Roger 
Bacon,  more  commonly  called  Friar  Bacon;  Nicho- 
las Copernicus,  and  the  immortal  Galileo  Galilei. 
Nor  does  the  former  ever  recur  to  my  recollection, 
unaccompanied  by  sincere  regret,  that  a  little  book 
purporting  to  contain  many  curious  anecdotes  of  that 
philosophic  paragon  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and 
from  which  I  derived  an  indelible  satisfaction  in  rny 
early  boyhood,  is  not  now  extant;  and  in  the  possess- 
ion of  every  youthful  reader  in  my  country. 

Roger  Bacon  was  a  conscientious  and  indefatigable 
devotee  of  natural  science — an  enthusiastic  aspirant 
after  practical  knowledge;  in  which  hallowed  enter- 
prise he  was  but  too  successful,  for  the  period  at 
which  he  lived.  His  numerous  and  novel  chemical 
experiments,  amongst  which  was  the  discovery  of  the 
composition  of  gun-powder,  were  so  wonderful  to 
his  ignorant  and  superstitious  cotemporaries,  thai 
they  contemplated  him  as  an  agent  of  the  devil;  and 
leagued  with  the  adversary  to  spoil  man's  spiritual 
prospects :  And  for  these  holy  aspirations  after  truth* — 
this  careful  listening  to  Nature's  interpretations  of 
herself,  he  was  denounced  as  a  dangerous  and  insuF- 
ferable  heretic;  forbade  to  teach  his  doctrines  at  th« 
public  university;  and  subsequently  twice  imprison- 
ed; in  the  last  instance,  during  ten  years;  forbade 
communication  with  his  friends,  and  so  poorly  fed^as 
oven  to  endanger  his  life— a  martyr  of  both  the  itt- 
quisition  of  Nature,  and  of  the  Church. 


70  THlOtOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


Notwithstanding  we  have  already  expended  a  re- 
mark upon  those  mathematical  prodigies,  Copernicus 
and  Galilei,  our  present,  particular  purpose  may, 
aevertheless,  excuse  its  repetition. 

You  have  ail,  doubtless,  both  heard  and  read, 
much  and  often,  of  those  great  philosophers  of  the 
fifteenth  century,  whom  Nature  had  endowed  with 
on  intellectual  voracity,  insatiable  of  her  most  prodi- 
gal and  choicest  revelations  —  swallowing,  digesting 
cuid  assimilating  to  their  own  minds,  with  the  easiegi 
facility,  facts  and  principles  which  would  stultify 
common  intellects  to  contemplate. 

The  name  of  Copernicus  is  justly  and  inseperabljr 
associated  with  our  present  sublime  system  of  matli- 
ematical  astronomy,  he  being  the  extraordinary  in- 
dividual, with  whom  it  substantially  originated.  And 
because  he  looked  around  him  with  a  scrutiny  un- 
known to  his  coternporaries;  and  familiarized  hirn- 
»elf  with  principles  of  which  the  world  had  never 
dreamed;  adopting  the  truths  of  Nature,  regardless 
of  their  apparent  discrepancy  with  revelation,  ha 
was  relentlessly  assailed  with  obloquy,  persecution 
and  outlawry,  by  the  same  Christian  Church  that 
claims  to  have  been  the  successful  patroness  of  all 
useful  science  for  the  entire  period  of  eighteen  hun- 
dred years. 

Of  Galilei,  more  should  be  said,  in  justice  to  his 
memory,  and  in  condemnation  of  his  cotemporaries, 
than  would  be  compatible  with  the  whole  of  the  pre- 
sent opportunity;  and  yet,  a  word  must  suffice,  to 
show  the  sort  of  patronage,  the  Church  bestowed 
upon  philosophy. 


CRITICISMS.  71 


This  was  the  man,  whose  genius,  attracted  by  the 
individual  footsteps,  wherein  Copernicus  had  sought 
out  the  material  of  a  future  edifice,  approached  the, 
yet,  unquarried  mountain,  where  a  few  unhewn 
blocks  were  scattered  at  its  base;  and  here,  its  prodi- 
gious energies  were  successfully  applied,  in  breaking 
np  and  fashioning  the  mountain  mass,  into  the  con- 
stituents of  an  exquisite,  aggregate  geometry. 

These  materials  were   erected,   by   his   individual, 

superhuman  strength,  into  a  most  magnificent  temple 

of  astronomical  science,  of  which,    only  the  cornice 

and  dome  remained,   for  the   ingenuity  of  a  Newton 

to   supply.     This    man,   unimpeached,    eren    by    hjs 

most  inveterate  adversaries,  of  any  other  delinquen- 

cy, than  a  persevering  scrutiny  of  Nature,  for  a  rev- 

elation of  her  uncominunicated  secrets,    became   tha 

nnfortunate  object  of  a  relentless  persecution,  which 

finally  deigned  to  offer  him   personal  safety,  in   ex- 

change for  his  moral  integrity.     In  this  dilemma,  into 

which  his  imputed  heresies  had  involved  him,  he,  un- 

luckily, preferred  hypocrisy  to  martyrdom;  and,  con- 

sonant  with   the   requisition    of  a  Romish   tribunal, 

'knelt  before  the    altar  of  a  persecuting  superstition, 

nnd,  with  his  hands  upon  the  reputedly   holy  evange- 

lists, declared,  before  God  and  a  bigoted  Inquisition, 

that  what  he  had  taught  of  the  mobility  of  the  earth, 

npon  its   axis,   and   in  its  solar  orbit,  was  a  false  and 

damnable  heresy,  contrary  to  scripture,  and  the  opin- 

ion of  the  Church.     But  as  he  arose  from  his  posture 

of  degrading,  hypocritical  humility,  the  resuscitated 

spirit  of  his  native  dignity  awoke  to  an  insuppressi- 


'*  THEOLOGICAL    CB1TJCISMS. 

We  indignation  at  the  base  duplicity,  to  which  his 
moral  cowardice  had  seduced  him,  and,  in  the  act  of 
retiring  from  that  covert  of  bigoted  misanthropy, 
exclaimed  in  the  contemptuousness  of  a  wounded 
Spirit,  "  Epur  si  mouve."— "  And  yet,  it  mores." 

Such  hare  been  the  usage  and  the  fate  of  mosl  of 
those  occasional  prodigies  of  genius,  which  Nature 
teems  to  have,  especially,  designed  as  the  literary 
pioneers  of  mankind,  to  the  literal  fruition  of  a  social 
millenium.  But  Prejudice  has  hitherto  succeeded  but 
loo  well,  in  thwarting  the  success  of  their  benerolen.1 
mission ! 

The  reasons,  therefore,  \vhy  1  venture  an  augurr., 
to  ourselves,  so  much  more  favorable  of  the  com- 
mendation of  posterity,  than  we  are  willing,  or  bound, 
to  bestow  upon  antiquity,  are,  that  Truth  has,  al 
length  disclosed  so  many  of  her  fascinations,  and  so 
much  of  the  sanativeness  of  her  character,  as,  finally, 
to  have  become,  with  many  individuals,  a  successful 
competitor,  with  fiction,  for  the  affection  and  respeci 
of  humanity; — that  the  caustic  acrimony,  of  a  perse- 
cuting prejudice,  has  been  very  considerably  diluted, 
by  the  blood  and  tears,  which  the  votaries  of  truth 
hare  so  often  and  so  freely,  shed,  at  its  unhallowed 
shrine— that  Facts,  thoroughly  scrutinized,  in  all  their 
parti  and  bearings,  are  growing  fashionable,  as  a 
substitute  for  the  vague  and  unmeaning  assumptions,, 
upon  which  ancient  theories  were  almost  exclusively 
founded;  and  that  a  stupid  veneration  for  the  names 
and  opinions  of  reputed  great  men  which  has,  hither- 
to, lain,  like  an  incubus  upoa  the  heaving  chest  of 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  13 

slumbering  Genius,  is  beginning  to  give  place  to  a 
reasonable  distrust  of  the  claims  of  the  one,  and  of 
the  infallibility  of  the  other.  In  fine,  mankind  are, 
more  generally,  waking  up  to  the  dignified  conscious- 
ness, that  they  may,  and  ought  to,  think  for  them- 
selves, upon  all  subjects,  in  which  they  have  a  com- 
mon interest.  And  these  circumstances  are  present- 
ed as  a  few  of  the  many  valid  evidences,  that  our 
literary  reputation  should,  and  will,  stand  fairer  with 
posterity,  than  that  of  antiquity  does  with  us. 

It  is  Truth,  then,  after  which  our  race  should  ex- 
clusively and  ardently  aspire;  nor  should  that  ardor 
be  dampened,  by  a  single  suspicion,  that  its  attain- 
ment can  possibly  prove  disastrous,  or  even  adverse, 
to  human  welfare. 

Error  and  Prejudice  are  the  earliest  characteristics 
of  reflective  humanity,  and  are  only  to  be  eradicated 
by  the  predominance  of  Truth  and  Reason,  which, 
unfortunately,  are  often  much  too  tardy  in  their  mis- 
sion, or  too  feeble  in  their  administration,  to  establish 
a  successful,  salvatory  dominion  over  the  human 
character: 

Thus  you  are  enabled  to  contemplate  the  slowly 
progressive  character  of  the  human  intellect,  and  to 
appreciate  the  obligation  which  science  is  under  to 
Theology,  for  at  least  sixteen  hundred  years  of  the 
present  era.  And  notwithstanding  all  the  boastful 
dogmatism  of  the  clergy,  that  Christianity  has  been 
the  pioneer,  and  most  liberal  contributor,  to  natural 
science,  for  the  whole  period  of  its  existence,  History 
so  flatly  contradicts  the  assertion  that  we  ought  to  be 


"4  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

«  <tf  S9«!<;  '»;.:: 

excused  for  suspecting,  its  promulgators  of  gross  ig- 
norance, or  culpable  dishonesty.  We  know,  that  as 
late  as  1633,  the  mathematical  prodigy,  Galileo,  was 
sentenced  to  interminable  imprisonment  in  the  cells 
of  a  self-styled,  holy  inquisition,  for  adhering  to  his 
opinion  that  the  earth  revolved  upon  its  axis,  and  al- 
so in  its  annual  solar-orbit—facts  as  little  disputed,  at 
present,  as  that  two  and  two  make  four.  Yes !  Chris- 
tianity, in.  this  nether  world,  has  been  another  name 
for  persecuting  intolerance,  and  virulent,  murderous 
contention.  It  has  set  its  cloven  hoof,  upon  the  ge- 
nius of  Free-inquiry,  with  an  inflexible  determination 
to  lacerate  it,  either  to  death  or  submission.  It  has 
inherited  the  bigotry  of  Judaism,  and  hoarded  the 
acquisition  with  usurious  care. 

Did  the  Jewish  law  demand  a  pecuniary  atonement 
for  what  it  denominated  a  sin  of  ignorance?  And  if 
Michael  Servetus  sinned  in  dissenting  from  the  dog- 
mas of  John  Galvin,  was  it  not  purely  the  sin  of  ig- 
norance; and  a  mere,  though  fatal  misfortune,  that 
he  was  unable  to  appreciate  the  necessity  *and  certain- 
ty of  three  coeternal,  coequal,  successively-begotten, 
indivisible,  individually-personal,  triune,  only-almigh- 
ty God,  who  has,  especially,  fore-ordained  whatever 
comes  to  pass;  and  that,  therefore,  man  is  predesti- 
nated to  the  character  and  events  that  shall  pertain  to 
him  for,  both,  time  and  eternity;  but  that  he  shall, 
nevertheless,  work  out  his  own  salvation,  from  a  state 
of  total  depravity,  to  that  of  pure  and  persevering 
saintship;  and  all  by  the  inevitable  operation  of  the 
resistless  grace  of  God?  Yes;  if  Servetus  sinned  in 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  75 

disbelieving  this  farrago  of  contradictory  nonsense, 
this  Calvinistic  platform  of  rottenness,  contagion,  de- 
lirium and  death,  was  it  not  a  very  great  improve- 
ment of  Judaism,  that  he  should  himself  be  burned 
in  atonement  for  his  sin,  or  otherwise  his  misfortune, 
if  ignorant?  But  Servetus  is  a  single  name  of  an  in- 
terminable catalogue,  written  with  the  faggot  or  the 
dagger,  in  the  life-blood  of  conscientious  men,  sacri- 
ficed upon  the  altar  of  theological  superstition.  And 
although  its  tusks  and  claws  are  less  murderous  now, 
than  formerly,  its  thirst  for  blood  is  unassuaged:  It 
growls  incessantly  at  the  thought,  that  fratricide  has 
grown  unfashionable;  nor  fails  to  emulate  its  worst 
ferocity,  in  the  insidiousness  and  multiplicity  of  its 
persecutions.  It  slanders  morality,  unmuzzled  by  its 
absurdities,  and  repudiates  truth,  unpledged  to  its  fic- 
titious purposes.  It  breathes,  throughout  this  nomi- 
nally free  Republic,  a  desolating  sirocco,  to  which 
opinion  must  surrender  in  submission,  or  in  suffoca- 
tion. It  ought  not  to  be  so,  especially  at  this  late  pe- 
riod of  our  history,  when  facilities  for  rational  and 
useful  learning,  are  so  greatly  multiplied,  as  almost  to 
cheat  mankind  into  an  acquaintance  with  Nature's 
secrets,  and  a  fascination  of  her  charms.  But  Super- 
stition is  neither  poor  in  expedients,  nor  slack  in 
stratagem.  Nor  has  she  ever  been  at  all  compunc- 
tious of  means,  that  success  has  more  than  justified. 

£»/ 

It  has  been,  nevertheless,  so  difficult  for  Pity  to  attain 
its  objects,  that  moral  corruption,  and  even  perjury 
itself,  have  been  sanctified  in  its  holy  enterprise. 
Strange,  that  God  should  be  driven  to  such  a  strait, 


76  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

for  means  to  propagate  his  own  most  sacred  and  mo- 
mentous truth:  A  truth,  if  truth  at  all,  no  less  mo- 
mentous to  Deity  than  man!  Yes!  Theology  in- 
volves, as  seriously,  the  beatitude  of  God,  as  the 
spiritual  blessedness  of  his  human  creatures.  The 
glory  of  God  would  seem  to  depend,  for  consumma- 
tion, upon  the  salvation  of  mankind;  and  its  accom- 
plishment, therefore,  upon  the  success  of  the  salvato- 
ry  institution,  of  which  Jesus  Christ  is  the  reputed 
medium:  So  that  wherever  the  Gospel  proves  unsuc- 
cessful, it  affords  an  instance  of  derogation  from  His 
anticipated  glory.  How  strange,  we  say  again,  that 
God  should  not  have  seasonably  foreseen  his  own  di- 
lemma, from  his  creature's  sins!  and  stranger  still,  to 
hope  for  extrication,  by  such  futile  instruments  as 
assume  to  be  of  his  adoption !  Yet  Theology  consists 
of  just  such  strangeness;  and  but  for  morality,  to 
which  it  speculatively  clings,  as  to  a  last  and  only 
hope,  a  single  ray  of  truth  would,  long  ago,  have 
blighted  its  fictitious  being,  and  expunged  it  from  the 
catalogue  of  human  fallacies. 


LECTURE  III. 

ATHEISM    AND    THEISM    DEFINED    AND    COMPARED, 

The  treatment  of  our  present  subject,  nor  that  ex- 
clusively, is  intended  to  be  characterized  by  the  strict- 
est candor  and  courtesy,  that  its  peculiar  character 
will  admit:  And  that  facts,  also,  whenever  they  can 
be  made  available,  shall  be  employed  with  entire  im- 
partiality, without  distortion  or  misrepresentation: 
And  if  hypothesis  shall  be,  sometimes,  unavoidable, 
as  upon  most  of  our  occasions  it  doubtless  will,  its 
admission  shall  be  upon  that  principle  only;  and 
whenever  adopted,  shall  not  only  have  undergone  my 
own  careful  scrutiny,  but  will  be  exposed  to  that  of 
the  Public,  to  be  adjudged  by  its  comparative  plausi- 
bility. 

I  am  well  aware  of  the  delicacy,  not  to  say  the 
danger,  of  my  position  with  the  orthodox  community 
wherein  I  live;  nor  less  so,  of  the  disparity  between, 
my  personal  effeminacy,  and  the  gigantic  burthen,  I 
have  assumed  to  carry. 

It  is  an  adage  of  the  olden  time,  that  an  ass  loaded 
with  gold  can  effect  his  entrance  without  difficulty, 


78  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

into  the  strongest  city.  But  then,  how  boisterous  the 
hue  and  cry,  Suspicion  would  excite,  against  the  un- 
welcome visitor,  were  his  load  mistaken  for  infection 
of  the  plague.  Yes,  although  it  should  be  transport- 
ed by  Apis  or  a  demigod.  No  matter  whether  it  be 
fool  or  knave,  that  caters  for  our  factitious  pleasures; 
he  is  flattered  and  cherished,  just  so  long  as  he  cheer- 
fully ministers  to  our  vanity  and  lipentiousness.  And 
though  he  were  the  literal  adversary  of  human  weal, 
whilst  he  should  carefully  humor  our  foibles,  and 
good-naturedly  assent  to  our  fallacies,  he  may  safely 
insinuate  himself  into  our  very  vitals,  and  deliberate- 
ly gnaw  himself  out  again,  not  merely  with  impunity, 
but  with  commendation.  But  let  an  angel,  a  demi- 
god, or  a  prodigy  of  human  wisdom,  suggest  a  fallacy 
in  our  present  notions,  or  an  evil  in  our  present  habits, 
he  is  taunted  with  his  folly,  or  condemned  for  his  im- 
pudence. His  name  is  heretic,  and  he  is  denounced 
as  a  blasphemer.  Persecution  lays  her  leaden  hand 
upon  his  enterprise,  and  Superstition  fattens  upon 
the  spoil.  His  life  is  verily  a  prologue  to  that  spirit- 
ual perdition,  to  which  Bigotry  has  triumphantly  as- 
signed him. 

Atheism  is  a  term  derived  from  the  Greek,  and 
means,  in  its  strict  interpretation,  without  God.  Its 
more  general  and  later  acceptation  has  been  however, 
without  a  belief  of  God — and  more  recently,  a  direct 
denial  of  the  existence  of  God.  Admitting  that 
mankind  have  almost  always,  and  almost  everywhere, 
believed  in  the  existence  of  a  God,  and  mostly  in  a 

multiplicity  of  them,  it  must  strike  the  superficial  ob- 

• 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


79 


server  with  a  good  deal  of  surprise,  that  there  should 
be  a  single  atheist  in  the  world,  unless  he  were  either 
an  idiot  or  a  lunatic.  And  this,  in  its  only  proper  ac- 
ceptation, is  most  emphatically  true:  For  whoever 
has  sufficient  intellect,  to  contemplate  the  simplest 
relations  of  cause  and  effect,  cannot,  in  any  rational 
interpretation  of  the  epithet,  be  denominated  an  athe- 
ist: He  will  have  acquired  a  belief  of  either  theism 
or  polytheism — of  one  God,  or  of  many  gods.  The 
states  of  natural,  and  social,  infancy,  therefore,  must 
be  allowed  to  be  most  congenial  with  old  fashioned 
atheism;  unless  it  shall  be  satisfactorily  ascertained, 
that  the  idea  of  God  is  instinctive,  or  connate;  and, 
consequently,  not  acquired  by  reflection^  or  induction. 

Since  it  is  undeniable,  that  the  idea  of  a  God  was 
early  excited,  and  has  almost  universally  prevailed 
among  mankind,  even  to  the  present  time,  the  first 
question  to  be  interpreted  is,  whence  and  wherefore 
has  such  an  idea  occurred? 

That  the  idea  of  God  is  not  intuitive,  instinctive, 
or  possessed  at  birth,  appears  to  be  more  than  proba- 
ble, from  the  consideration,  that  children  appear  never 
to  have  acquired  it,  except  in  the  ordinary  course  of 
infantile  education;  and  of  which  they  demand  the 
same  particular  explanation,  as  of  any  other  subject 
of  human  inquiry.  It  is,  therefore,  a  plausible  hy- 
pothesis, that  this  idea  was  originally  the  product  of 
reflection;  and,  when  fairly  analyzed,  will  be  found 
to  be  identical  with  undefinable  causality.  And  there 
seems  to  be  no  other  possible  method  of  solving  the 
problem,  whence  and  wherefore,  the  idea  of  a  God, 


80  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

whether  supreme  or  subordinate;  ultimate  causality 
being  identical  with  the  former,  and  indefinite,  secon- 
dary causality  with  the  latter. 

So  entirely  inadequate  is  human  apprehension  to 
trace  the  principle  of  causality  to  its  ultimatum,  that, 
upon  many  subjects,  the  profoundest  philosophy  is 
but  a  single  step  in  advance  of  piimitive  barbarism. 
And  the  following  is  offered,  in  explication  of  our 
proposition. 

The  eye  of  a  savage  lights  upon  a  watch,  that  cas- 
ualty has  dropped  in  his  path:  He  views  it  with  a 
suspicion,  and  approaches  it  with  a  cautiousness  pe- 
culiar to  his  race:  He  ventures  not  to  touch  it;  but, 
with  a  stick  some  yard  in  length,  he  moves  it  to  and 
fro,  until  he  perceives  it  to  have  neither  teeth  nor 
claws.  He  ventures  then,  though  warily,  to  touch  it 
with  a  finger — then  with  another;  and  finally  to  take 
it  from  the  ground,  as  a  most  wonderful  living  speci- 
men of  creative  power,  whose  origin,  he  most  de- 
voutly and  reverently,  refers  to  Manatou,  or  him  who 
made  the  Indian.  Here  the  philosopher  smiles,  con- 
temptuously, in  his  cultivated  egotism,  at  the  childish 
simplicity  of  this  native  forester,  who  sees,  or  thinks 
he  sees,  a  God,  in  human  mechanism;  and,  in  boast- 
ful confidence,  exclaims,  that  he  can  trace  this  very 
watch  to  man's  contrivance,  and  the  manipulation  of 
human  fingers.  But  ask  him  how  contrivance  and 
those  fingers  came. — How  humbled  is  his  pride  of 
learning,  when  he  finds  himself,  so  soon,  obliged  to 
ape  the  savage  in  his  answer!  A  single  step  has 
found  him  kneeling  to  the  Indian's  Manatou,  by  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  81 

name  of  God,  in  shuffling  apology  for  his  own  imbe- 
cility. In  this  example,  we  discover  not  only  the 
slight  difference  between  the  lowest  barbarism  and 
the  highest  cultivation;  but  that  the  idea  of  God  is 
the  same,  with  the  whole  human  race,  and  identical 
with  supposed  ultimate  causality.  For  we  see  that, 
because  the  savage  was  ignorant  of  the  degree  of  hu- 
man ingenuity,  required  for  the  construction  of  a 
watch,  he  referred  it  to  the  same  power,  or  princi- 
ple of  causation,  that  produced  himself — that  is,  one 
of  which  he  was  totally  ignorant.  And  although  the 
philosopher  escapes  the  absurdity  of  expending  his 
veneration  upon  a  human  mechanic,  under  the  idea 
of  God;  what  more  does  he  know  of  the  origin  of 
man,  than  the  savage,  viz..  that  he  must,  have  been 
the  product  of  some  antecedent  cause;  which  cause 
however  seems  to  be  altogether  beyond  the  precinct 
of  human  scrutiny;  and  hence  his  veneration  is  at 
length,  like  that  of  the  savage,  expended  upon  un- 
known causality.  It  seems  therefore  plausible,  at 
least,  that  the  idea  of  God  the  creator  is  identical 
with  that  of  ultimate  causality,  by  whatever  epithet 
it  may  have  been  distinguished;  and  is  the  only  theo- 
logical one,  in  which  all  mankind,  both  savage  and 
civilized,  ignorant  and  learned,  have  been  found, 
unanimously,  to  agree.  For  it  is  undeniable,  that 
the  attributes  appropriated  to  this  God,  by  different 
persons  and  nations,  have  been  as  various  and  disso- 
nant, as  have  been  the  states  of  human  science,  mor- 
als and  opinion:  And  like  every  other  department  of 
intellectual  enterprise,  have  been  progressively  rnodi- 

10 


«2  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

fied,  as  society  has  emerged  from  the  slough  of  prim- 
itive barbarism. 

The  idea  of  ultimate  causality,  or  of  an  unknown 
cause,  preceding  the  last  known  phenomenon,  iu  any 
continuous  course  of  reflection,  upon  natural  rela- 
tionship, can  not  be  evaded;  and  being  identical  with 
that  of  creative  omnipotence,  must,  consequently,  be 
as  universal  as  the  ability  to  reflect:  And  since  it  was, 
a  long  time  ago,  clearly  discovered  that  philosophy 
increases  the  distance  between  mediate  and  ultimate 
causality,  by  multiplying  the  particulars  of  the  for- 
mer, it  is  not  surprising,  that  superstitionists  shall 
have,  for  a  series  of  past  generations,  almost  unani- 
mously, decried  what  they  have  denominated  human 
learning,  as  tending  to  divert  the  attention  from  ulti- 
mate to  mediate  causation;  or,  in  other  words,  divert- 
ing it  from  the  creator  to  the  creature,  and  thereby 
lessening  the  piety,  believed  to  be  indispensable  to 
spiritual  salvation. 

Our  apprehension  of  God  is  precisely  the  same  as 
that  of  materiality:  And  certainly  very  few  persons 
have  been  ever  found,  who  have  seriously  denied  the 
existence  of  the  latter.  Wherefore  then,  it  may  well 
be  asked,  has  atheism  obtained  a  name  and  a  charac- 
ter among  the  fallacies  of  mankind  ? 

The  evidences  in  support  of  God,  and  of  matter, 
when  fairly  examined,  will  be  found  of  exactly  the 
same  import;  and  therefore  of  equal  validity,  in  aid 
of  both  propositions.  And  whilst  an  indefinite  diver- 
sity of  natural  phenomena,  denominated  creations 
(more  appropriately  formations)  demonstrates  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  Sj 

existence  of  the  former,  or  of  God;  those  physical 
qualities,  that  stimulate  our  senses,  and  modify  our 
consciousness,  as  clearly  testify  to  that  of  the  latter. 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  we  deduce  a  creator, 
from  the  creations,  or  existences,  that  surround  us; 
and  not  from  any  innate  or  instinctive  idea  of  such  u 
character  J  We  acquire  the  idea  of  God,  also,  in  the 
same  manner  as  we  do  that  of  Nature,  viz.,  by  an 
irresistible  recognition  of  what  are  denominated  its 
qualities  or  attributes:  And  although  we  know  noth- 
ing of  ejther,  intrinsically,  it  would,  notwithstanding, 
be  no  less  absurd  to  deny  their  existence  than  our 
own. 

Ultimate  causality,  alias  God,  therefore,  as  the 
primitive  agent,  in  the  production  of  Nature's  phe- 
nomena, and  Materiality  as  affording  a  substratum 
for  their  support,  are  equally  incomprehensible  and 
incontrovertible.  But  it  is  nevertheless  equally  true, 
that  notwithstanding  the  conclusion  is  unavoidable, 
that  both  God  and  matter  do  exist,  that  existence,  so 
far  as  human  apprehension  is  concerned,  is  a  mere 
lagical  deduction — an  abstract  metaphysical  conclu- 
sion, arising  exclusively  from  a  recognition  of  those 
phenomena,  which  they  are  severally  believed,  but 
not  known,  to  produce. 

We  acquire  the  ideas  of  figure,  color,  extension, 
resistance,  motion  and  rest,  which  we  denominate  the 
properties  and  states  of  u  supposed  substratum,  or 
predicate,  of  which  the  world  is  ready  to  declare,  it 
positively  knows  its  existence,  as  substance  or  mattei •-, 
of  which  however,  we  have  no  other  idea,  than  that 


&4  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

of  the  necessity  of  such  an  existence.  Nor  have  we 
any  appropriate  language,  with  which  to  describe  ul- 
timate principles  and  atoms,  which,  as  I  have  already 
said,  are  simple  metaphysical  deductions,  which  it  is 
equally  impossible  we  shall  ever  be  able  to  under- 
stand or  disbelieve. 

That  God,  or  Deity  is  synonymous  with  principle 
or  attribute,  inherent  in,  and  coeternal  with,  matter, 
and  identical  with  ultimate  causality,  seems  to  be 
most  effectually  sustained  by  the  following  reflections. 

Were  God  an  ultra,  or  supermundane  agent,  who 
cogitated,  with  infinite  perfection,  and  executed  with 
infallible  precision,  the  various  principles  and  phe- 
nomena of  Nature,  it  is  clear,  that  the  system  of  op- 
erations, once  instituted,  would  inevitably  proceed, 
during  its  destined  period,  with  undeviating  exact- 
itude; nor  need  a  God  to  watch  or  modify  its  pro- 
gress. In  this  view  of  the  subject,  a  God  is  undenia- 
bly nugatory.  Not  so  whenever  the  name  of  God  is 
used  as  synonymous  with  ultimate  causality,  which 
is  a  principle  inherent  in  matter,  and  indispensable  to 
the  development  and  prosecution  of  its  phenomena: 
For  otherwise  existence  would  be  without  an  object, 
or  the  possibility  of  a  change.  Silence  and  stillness, 
or  unvaried  monotomy,  would  characterize  a  nugato- 
ry world;  and  God  would  be  the  only  spectator  of  his 
own  fatuity ! 

Every  circumstance,  or  change  in  Nature,  howev- 
er magnificent  or  minute,  depends  upon  ultimate  cau- 
sality for  its  existence.  And  however  long  or  com- 
plicated shall  be  the  chain  of  productive  circumstan- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  85 

ces,  it  must  have  originated  in,  and  been  sustained  by 
it.  Therefore,  while  an  extra-mundane  God  must 
be  an  idle  spectator  of  the  phenomena,  his  eternal 
decree  has  infallibly  ordained,  ultimate  causality 
must  enter  into  the  constitution  of  every  event;  and 
can  never  be  dispensed  with,  while  consequences  re- 
main dependent  upon  antecedent  causation.  We 
might  as  well  expect  to  see  figure  without  substance; 
or  meet  resistance  in  a  vacuum,  as  that  change  would 
occur  independently  of  the  agency  of  this  ultimate 
principle,  which  theists  denominate  God.  Hence,  it 
would  seem  to  be  one  of  the  clearest  propositions  in 
nature,  that  atheist  is  an  unmeaning  epithet,  when 
applied  to  an  inhabitant  of  Christendom,  in  the  pos- 
session of  common  sense,  and  common  cultivation; 
and  that  he,  who  thinks  himself  such,  is  altogether 
mistaken  in  his  man,  according  to  any  interpretation 
which  cultivated  reason,  of  the  present  time,  would 
deign  to  sanction.  And  yet,  the  world  believes  it  has 
abundant,  just  occasion  for  the  use  of  such  an  epi- 
thet. The  question,  therefore,  is,  Whence  came  this 
great,  and  almost,  universal  error,  amongst  mankind  ~' 
Doubtless,  in  the  personification  of  causality,  and  in 
the  fictitious  and  diverse  characteristics,  or  attributes 
with  which  it  has  been  clothed. 

Judaism  is  particularly  unfortunate,  in  the  charac- 
ter of  its  deity,  which  it  endows  with  the  frailties  of 
humanity,  without  its  common  sense:  And  in  order 
to  redeem  my  pledge  of  candor  and  impartiality,  I 
feel  myself  obliged  to  present  you  with  a  few  Biblical 
quotations  in  corroboration  of  the  truth  of  my  remark. 


86  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

Did  God,  subsequently  to  his  entire  creation,  <Je- 
clare,  as  in  Gen.  1.  31,  That  every  thing  he  had  made 
was  very  good;  and  this  in  a  culpable  forgetfulness  of 
the  diabolical  wiles  of  the  serpent,  which  were,  so 
soon,  to  pervert  the  ordinances  of  omnipotence,  and 
write  eternal  damnation  as  the  epilogue  of  human 
tragedy?  For,  if  the  history  of  the  fall  is  true,  the 
seduction  and  its  consequences,  were  within  the 
knowledge  of  omniscience,  and  therefore  at  the  latch- 
es of  the  almighty. 

And  here,  we  find  some  striking  lineaments  of  a 
most  strange,  and  inconsistent  Jewish  God. 

If  those  peculiar  vegetables,  denominated  the  trees 
of  life,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil,  were 
the  products  of  a  general  creative  principle,  it  ap- 
pears somewhat  strange,  that  they  should  not  have 
been  somewhere  else  produced,  where  soil  and  cli- 
mate were  no  less  genial.  And  if  not  thus  generated, 
it  seems  that  they,  or  at  least  the  latter,  must  have 
been  especially  ordained  for  the  ruinous  catastrophe 
to  which  it  so  eminently  contributed.  And  if  God 
foreordained  whatever  comes  to  pass,  he  cannot  es- 
cape the  implication  of  having  instituted  the  whole 
process  of  seduction,  and  that  apparently  for  no 
more  commendable  an  object,  than  to  create  a  plausi- 
ble but  ficticious  reason  for  the  painful  indulgence  of 
almighty  and  eternal  vindictiveness. 

Did  the  eating  the  forbidden  fruit,  so  miraculously 
improve  the  apprehension  of  our  first  parents,  that 
rhey  mutually  blushed  at  the  conscious  immodesty  of 
exposing  their  nakedness  to  each  other;  and  was  this 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS,  87 

important  trial  of  character  omitted  in  their  children's 
inheritance,  whilst  the  penalty  of  disobedience  was 
faithfully  transmitted  ?  And  is  it  fairly  deducible, 
from  this  account,  that  but  for  the  transgression,  man 
must  have  forever  remained  in  the  imbecility  and  vul- 
gar nudity  of  the  beast,  and  hence  acquired  his  supe- 
riority at  the  expense  of  eternal  damnation  ? 

The  story  of  the  fall  leaves  no  doubt,  that  primi- 
tive man  was  well  endowed  with  animal  propensities, 
without  which  he  would  indeed  have  been  the  per- 
sonification of  absurdity  itself,  and  with  them  the  un- 
fortunate subject  of  the  most  fatal  seduction. 

Did  God  endow  mankind  with  the  propensities,  be- 
cause they  were  indispensable  to  his  enterprise,  and 
yet  mistake  their  tendency  to  mischievous  excess  ? 
Or  did  he  mean,  that  reason  should  be  competent  to 
their  judicious  exercise,  and  yet  mistake  the  quanti- 
ty required  ;  and  therefore  start,  like  one  surprised 
at  man's  unrightousness  ;  and  grieve^  repent,  and 
then  malevolently  condemn  those  creatures,  for  whom 
all  else  was  made,  and  whence  his  godship  was  re- 
flected, to  the  sateless  burnings  of  an  endless  hell  ? 

Why  does  not  this  veracious  and  exact  historic 
record  inform  us,  how  long  this  garden  with  its  pe- 
culiar products  preserved  its  being  and  its  character, 
after  the  expulsion  of  the  human  pair  ;  and  how  long 
its  dangerous  enclosure  was  miraculously  secured  ? 
Suppose,  for  so  we  may,  that  those  delinquents  had 
partaken  of  the  other  fruit,  while  God  had  left  it  at 
their  option,  and,  most  strangely,  unprohibited. — In 
what  sad  dilemma  would  Jehovah  and  mankind  been 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITJCJSMS. 

placed  ?  An  immortal  race  of  procreative,  eating- 
animals,  threatening  an  accumulation,  at  some  future 
period,  that  space  could  not  accommodate,  and  for 
whom  the  earth,  were  it  digestible,  would  fail  to 
make  a  meal.  What  almighty  power  and  cunning 
would  have  been,  ere  this,  required,  to  make  provis- 
ion, of  both  room  and  sustenance,  for  such  a  race,  my 
algebra  will  fail  to  calculate.  And  do  you  think  the 
notion  of  a  deathless,  eating  and  prolific  race  of  ani- 
mals, so  plausible  as  to  have  been  adopted  by  omnis- 
ciency,  or  executed  by  omnipotence  ?  Or,  of  the 
tragedy  of  the  fall,  do  you  not  think  it  passing  strange, 
that  what  of  undeveloped  mischief,  almighty  presci- 
ence must  have  seen,  omnipotence  should  have  failed 
to  obviate  ;  unless  it  shall  have  happened  before  the 
attribute  of  goodness  shall  have  entered  the  triune 
partnership. 

"  And  the  Lord  had  respect  unto  Abel,  and  to  his 
offering  :  But  unto  Cain,  and  to  his  offering,  he  had 
no  respect."  Now,  this  conduct  of  God,  towards 
these  two  individuals,  were  it  of  a  parent  to  his  chil- 
dren, would  be  a  subject  of  the  severest  reprehension. 
Wherefore,  then,  has  Inspiration  withheld  from  us 
the  reasons  for  its  justification  ;  and  thus  exposed 
mankind  to  the  hazardous  liability  of  distrusting  the 
justice  and  impartiality  of  his  maker,  or  the  truth 
of  inspiration  ?  Was  Cain  acquainted  with  the  na- 
ture, and  the  crime,  of  fratricide  ?  And  whence  was 
such  acquaintance  formed  ? — Or  if  otherwise,  did  a 
God  of  justice  set  the  first  example  of  retrospective 
legislation,  the  veriest  shame  to  human  tyrants  ;  of 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  89 

visit  with  a  merciless  retribution,  an  act,  not  yet  pro- 
hibited, nor  criminally  defined  ? 

Again  we  read,  "  And  God  saw  that  the  wicked- 
ness of  man  was  great  in  the  earth  ;  and  that  every 
imagination  of  his  heart  was  only  evil  continually. 
And  it  repented  the  Lord  that  he  had  made  man  on 
the  earth  ;  and  it  grieved  him  at  his  heart."  And 
here  I  pledge  myself,  that  you  shall  be  pardoned  the 
herisy,  of  asking  whether  the  language  of  this  quota- 
tion is  most  appropriate  to  God,  or  man,  whatever 
penalty  shall  be  awarded  to  the  impiousness  of  my 
reply. 

Should  God's  prescience,  or  foreknowledge  be  con- 
templated as  a  constituent  of  his  own  eternal,  uncVea- 
ted  self  ?  Then,  no  fact  pertaining  to  the  history 
of  man,  or  Nature,  can  have  been  new  to  such  a 
character.  And,  if  God  saw  from  eternity,  the  griev- 
ous wickedness,  his  human  creatures  would  volun- 
tarily, and  therefore  inevitably,  commit;  nor  believed 
His  own  omnipotence  was  able  to  restrain  it;  what  a 
wretched  life  of  penitence  and  grief,  God's  first  eterni- 
ty mnst  have  been  ?  For,  with  God  the  occurrence 
of  the  evil  could  not  have  aggravated  the  misery  of 
its  contemplation.  Again,  we  ask,  did  God  commit 
so  strange  an  oversight,  in  arranging  his  affairs,  as 
to  endow  his  human  creatures  with  power  to  thwart 
his  own  designs — to  mar  his  bliss,  and  also  damn 
themselves  to  endless  misery — and  meanwhile  sit  in 
endless,  penitential,  mournful  contemplation  of  His 
own  unfortunate  improvidence,  or  imbecility  ?  Did 
God  endow  mankind  with  freedom  of  both  will  and 

11 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

••;;  and,  at  the  same  time,  know  ho\v  perversely 
rli.-y  would  use  it  f  Then,  by  the  rules  of  human  judg- 
ment, He  was  either  impotent,  or  malicious  :  For  man, 
apparently,  were  better  not  to  be,  than  to  be  the  sub- 
ject of  interminable  perdition:  And,  therefore,  God 
should  have  left  him  uncreated,  or  have  been  more 
provident  of  hi?  welfare  ! — "And  it  grieved  him(God.); 
at  hi*  heart."  And  is  this  expression  applicable  to  aGocl. 
the  omnipotent,  and  otnnipervasivc,  principle  of  life, 
netivity  and  transformation  throughout  the  universe: 
Judaism  would  have  it,  to  a  heartless,  bigoted, 
partial,  malicious,  revengeful,  relentless,  extermina- 
ting impersonation  of  inconsistency  itself.  Or  is  it 
not,  in  truth,  an  expression  of  mere  humanity,  speak- 
ing ifrnorantly  of  itself,  and  referring  to  the  heart, 
what  belongs;  exclusively  to- the  head  : 

The  deluge  next  presents  itself,  as  a  competent  and 
unimpeachable  witness  to  the  inconsistency  and  imbe- 
cility of  the  Jewish  God  ;  to  whom  the  following  in- 
quiries might  have  been  presented  with  no  bad  grace: 
Or  perhaps,  with  more  propriety,  to  the  writer  of  the 
fabulous  nonsense. 

And  did  Omnisciency  misapprehend, 
How  ill  its  projects  must  thereafter  end  : 
Did  God,  at  man's  depravity  awake, 
Too  late  to  remedy  the  sad  mistake, 
Of  having  made  him,  as  he  should  not  be — 
Not  demi-God,  but  demi-devil  he  ! 
And,  therefore,  form  a  project  quite  too  odd, 
For  any  other,  than  a  Jewish,  God  ; 
Namely,  the  diluvian  expedient, 
Without  a  plausible  ingredient, 
With  which  to  work  a  thorough  reformation, 
Of  the  entire,  degenerate  creation — 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


Accepting  Noah,  as  security, 

For  his  successor's  moral  purity  ; 

Which  seems  a  project  altogether  strange, 

For  any  being,  not  yet  quite  deranged  : 

Nor  could  another  hope,  from  such  foul  seed 

To  reproduce  a  renovated  breed  : 

Didst  thou  compute  the  water  as  it  stood  ; 

And  cube  the  five-mile,  superficial  flood  ? 

Or  cast,  how  much  the  mass  of  water  weighed  ?  . 

Or  how  Miss  Luna,  in  her  orb  was  stayed  ? 

For  sceptics  are  disposed  to  make  a  fuss, 

As  though  her  highness  would  have  called  on  us — 

And  further  say,  nor,  seemingly,  in  fun, 

That  Earth  and  Moon,  must  both,  at  once,  have  run, 

A  more  than  Gilpin-journey,  to  the  Sun. 

Didst  thou  see,  clearly,  where  the  stock  was  laid, 

Of  which  this  universal  sea  was  made  ? 

Was  it  produced  in  vapor,  from  the  earth, 

Whilst  Oceans  were  unequal  to  its  birth? 

And  were  months  used  to  bring-  the  thing  about  > 

Seas  must  have  risen,  in  form  of  water-spout  ! 

And  were  it,  thus  far,  marvelously  done, 

The  work  of  miracles  was  but  begun  ! 

Since  ten  thousand  years,  at  the  common  rate,, 

Were  scanty,  for  it  to  evaporate  ; 

And  time  itself,  would  scarcely  fit  the  soil, 

To  recompense  the  ploughman  for  his  toij  ! 

And  were  the  flood  no  higher  than  the  hill, 

Upon  whose  top,  the  Ark,  at  length,  stood  still, 

Four  thousond  years  would  scarcely  dry  the  .plain, 

That  trees  and  herbage  might  appear  again. 

Hence,  to  have  dried  it  expeditiously, 

Earth's  heat  must  have  been  raised  prodigiously, — • 

So  high  indeed^  that  gods  might  be  supplied, 

With  steaming  chowder  from  the  boiling  tide  ; 

And,  if  the  gods  have  hearts,  it  would  not  do, 

That  they  should  not  have  food  and  entrails  too  : 

And  were  the  water,  as  it  may  be  said, 

Especially,  for  this  occasion  made — 

Say,  whence  the  elements,  of  which  'twas  wroui; 

Or  what  the  neighboring  planet,  whence  'twas  brought  ; 

And  then,  how  much  almighty  pow'r  'twould  cost, 

To  right  again,  the  system's  balance  lost! 

Nor  seems  a  -work,  with  more  vexation  fraught, 


THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

Except  to  make  a  universe  of  naught, 
Than  to  unmake  that  world  of  surplus  rain, 
Which  else  must  have  involved  the  earth  again  : 
And  were  there  gods,  whom  mankind  could  abuse, 
By  any  terms  of  slander,  he  could  uee — 
How  base  the  sacrilege,  to  charge  a  plan 
So  fatuous,  on  any  thing  but  man! — 

Or,  if  you  would  have  it  said  in  vulgar  prose— Did 
God  foresee,  ere  man  was  made,  the  strange  prepos- 
terous character  he  would  sustain — the  mad  devotion 
he  would  pay  to  passion  and  licentiousness — the  deep 
corruption  of  a  perverted    mind,    and   the   voluntary 
wickedness  he  would  perpetrate;  nor  yet,  revoke,  nor 
modify,  a  plan   so   palpably  defective?     Or  did  he 
sleep  so  soundly,  those,  more  than,   sixteen  hundred 
years,  from  the  creation,  to  the  flood,   that  the  whole 
world's  joint,  boisterous  blasphemy  awaked  him,  only, 
when  human  wickedness  was  so  incorrigible,  that  his 
own   omnipotence  was  unable  to  reform  it?     And  did 
he,  therefore,  as  the  only,  or   most  feasible,  expedi- 
ent, decree  the  total   extermination  of  the  race?     A 
project,  you  must  all  acknowledge  would  have  been, 
especially,  successful,  had  he  punctiliously  pursued  it! 
But   that   it  seems  he  did  not  do!  And  do  you  really 
believe  an  all-wise  God  could  have  been  so   improvi- 
dent, as  to  expect  to  regenerate  mankind,  by  making 
drunken    Noah  their  progenitor?    Was  it  like  a  God 
to  fail  in  his  mechanical  design? — Or   having   failed, 
to  destroy  the  labor  of  his   hands,  in   childish   petu- 
lance, in  order  to  allay  his  own  heart's  grief?    And  is 
this  to  be  received  as  a  specimen  of  God's  almighty 
triple  infinitude?     Was  the  project  of  the  Flood, that 
involved  a  course  of  countless  miracles,  of  which  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  93 

least  was  tantamount  to  original  creation,  verily,  the 
suggestion  of  that  unearthly  Logos,  that  planned  the 
system  of  both  temporal  and  eternal  things?  And 
was  it  not  the  inevitable  consequence  of  the  sweeping 
.  agitations — the  lacerating  and  disorganizing  concuss- 
ions— the  suffocative  pressure,  and  atmospheric  exclu- 
sion, attendant  upon  the  deluge,  that  vegetable,  as 
well  as  animal,  life  must  have  been  universally  ex- 
tinguished? And  how  were  fish  of  countless  species, 
saved  from  being  overwhelmed,  destroyed  and  deeply 
buried  amidst  the  avalanches  of  upland  rocks  and 
trees  and  soil,  the  myriads  of  newborn  cataracts  must 
have  driven,  madly,  ocean  ward?  Do  you  think  it 
probable,  that  fish  and  vegetables,  which  seem  to  have 
been  uncared  for,  were  really  able  to  withstand  a 
shock,  that,  without  the  aid  of  countless  miracles, 
must  inevitably  have  been  the  world's  catastrophe? 
And  would  you  not  severely  chide  your  wild  imagi- 
nation that  should  see,  in  retrospect,  the  diluvian  pa- 
triarch, as  he  may  have  stood  upon  the  then  youthful 
brow  of  the  long-since  venerable  and  snow-capped 
Ararat,  (where  one  seems  to  see  that  unique  water- 
craft  of  primeval  time,  entombed  beneath  accumula- 
ting frosts  of  more  than  forty  centuries)  and  in  fear- 
ful sadness,  look  around  him,  upon  the  utter  desola- 
tion of  all  of  life  and  hope,  that  once  had  been;  when 
lo!  from  where  had  lately  swept  the  besom  of  de- 
struction, and  earth  itself  but  just  unwrapped  of  one 
continuous  ocean,  there  shall  have  come  forth,  a 
feathered  witness,  to  cheer  the  little  household,  with 
the  gladsome  tidings,  that  the  lately  ruined  earth  was 


94  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

now  itself  airain,  and  already  green,    with    renovated 

heritage: 

And  this  diluvian  fallacy,  together  with  the  fabu- 
lous childish  nonsense  of  the  Fall,  is  seriously,  and 
even  coercively.  urged  upon  the  people  of  philosophic 
Christendom,  in  this  forty-third  year  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  as  though  it  were  the  very  genius  of  Inspi- 
ration, rehearsing  the  revelations  of  Almighty  God. 
And  with  whom  there  rests  a  doubt  of  its  divinity, 
there  also  rests  the  undivided  curse  of  Spiritualism? 

And  yet,  the  question  urges  itself  again,  and  again, 
upon  human  consideration,  whether  God  did  really 
repent  and  gvieve  at  his  heart,  like  a  disappointed  in- 
fant, for  what  omniscience  did  not  foresee,  or  omnip- 
otence could  not  prevent? 

Or  whether  it  was  not  Jehovah's  plan, 
To  stultify,  or  curse,  the  race  of  manr 
And,  lest  he  should  relent,  assumed  an  cath. 
He  kept  so  well,  as  to  accomplish  both! 

And  do  you  feel  assured,  that  Noah's  fabled  ark 
was  adequate  to  the  object,  for  which  it  is  said  to 
have  been  constructed?  And  have  you  carefully  ex- 
amined all  the  circumstances  involved  therein,  and 
found  them  clearly  to  corroborate  the  probabilitv  of 
that  event?  If  so,  you  are  much  more  fortunate,  in 
these  particulars,  than  your  humble  servant,  who  has, 
never  yet,  been  fully  able  to  reconcile,  with  his  poor 
dividend  of  intellect,  all  the  apparent  difficulties  pre- 
sented in  the  case.  And  yet  religious  Faith  descries 
innumerous  things,  as  clearly,  as  shines  the  cloudless 
sun  at  noon-day,  that  impious  Reason,  with  all  her 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  9l> 

artificial  aids,  as  vainly  looks  for,  as  for  courtesy  from 
a  bigot.  Have  you  not  already  learned,  from  fre- 
quent, pulpit  specimens,  hq\v  entirely  abortive  are 
Reason's  efforts  in  behalf  of  Faith?  Nor  is  the  cast- 
susceptible  of  amendment,  whilst  their  vocations  art- 
less alike  than  cash  and  credit! 

Allow  me  to  present  you  with  a  single  specimen  of 
the  imbecility  of  Reason,  in  its  unnatural  association 
•\vith  Faith;  and  in  what  hopeless  predicament  that 
subject  must  be,  that  relies  upon  no  better  arguments 
in  its  favor,  than  1  have  sometimes  heard  from  the 
pulpit,  upon  the  question  of  the  deluge.  Yes,  I  have 
heard  a  reverend  advocate  for  the  Bible's  literality 
and  truth,  contest  the  doubts  of  Scepticism,  with  zeal 
enough  to  frighten  Reason  from  the  sanctuary;  and, 
in  conclusion  of  a  labored  argument  of  sounds  and 
attitudes,  in  proof  of  written  revelation,  declare,  em- 
phatically, "that  Noah's  ark  had  room  enough  for  all 
it  was  intended  to  preserve;  at  least  for  all  with 
ivhich  mankind  were  then  acquainted."  Alas !  that  God 
should  be  obliged  to  leave  his  work  to  be  accomplished 
by  such  infirmity !  And  do  you  think  that  Reason 
would  ever  risk  herself  again  with  such  an  incompe- 
tent interpreter?  Or  insanely  blast  her  honor,  to  aid 
the  credit  of  a  fiction?^  A  sacrifice,  in  either  case,  too 
wanton  to  justify  a  serious  suspicion. 

Considering  the  peculiar  embarrassments  of  time 
and  circumstances,  it  would  really  seem  to  have  been 
rather  an  extraordinary  undertaking,  for  a  single  indi- 
vidual, or  even  a  single  family,  to  construct,  in  the 
very  teeth,  of  a  jeering  and  opposing  Incredulity,  that 


96  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

mammoth  world-preservative,  within  the  time  allotted 
by  Biblical  Chronologists. 

Ere  log-canoes,  or  bulrush  substitutes,  were  invent- 
ed, a  Nation's  genius,  and  a  Nation's  wealth  would 
have  been  scarcely  adequate  to  such  an  enterprise. 
And  yet  I  will  not  pronounce  the  thing  impossible; 
but,  rather  than  risk  my  teeth  with  so  unchewable  a 
mouthful,  will  put  my  capacious  gullet  into  requisi- 
tion, and  swallow  it  at  once.  But  there  are  other 
particulars,  which  are  not,  so  conveniently,  to  be  dis- 
posed of;  being,  not  only,  too  tough  to  chaw,  but, 
palpably,  too  gross  to  swallow.  But  admitting  Noah 
to  have  been  either  the  butt  of  ridicule  for  his  appa- 
rent simplicity,  or  an  object  of  pity,  for  his  supposed 
lunacy,  throwing  him  entirely  npon  his  individual  re- 
sources, for  the  accomplishment  of  his  magnificent 
undertaking;  and  that  he,  nevertheless,  succeeded, 
and  that,  too,  within  the  apparently  inadequate  period 
of  the  year  two  thousand  three  hundred  and  forty- 
nine  before  Christ;  and  that  it  was  also  fully  adequate 
to  its  design;  however  heavy  their  demand  upon  our 
credulity,  are  altogether  the  most  plausible  particulars 
of  this  preposterous  narrative. 

Do  you  think  it  within  the  range  of  the  strangest 
probability  that,  in  the  short  period  of  seven  days, 
allowed  to  Noah  for  freighting  his  vessel,  seventy 
thousand  living  creatures  were  actually  and  simulta- 
neously collected  from  their  peculiar  and  indefinitely 
diversified  locations  and  climates — from  every  point 
of  compass,  and  every  habitable  portion  of  the  earths 
geographical  surface,  together  with  their  appropriate 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  97 

nourishment,  which  could  not  have  been  less  than  ten 
times  their  own  bulk,  or  even  their  own  weight; 
amounting,  in  the  aggregate  to  an  equivalent  of  seven 
hundred  and  seventy  thousand  such  animals,  ten  of 
which  only>  viz.,  the  mastadon,  elephant,  rhinoceros, 
hippopotamus  and  elk,  would  have  required,  at  least, 
one  hundred  and  ninety  tons  of  vegetable  food;  a  lit- 
tle less  than  an  ordinary  ship  load,  and,  in  the  com- 
mon, farming  way  of  packing,  would  have  filled  five 
common  barns:  And  in  this  way  of  proceeding,  we 
shall  soon  have  appropriated  the  whole  of  Noah's 
mammoth  vessel. 

Have  you  ever  thought,  how  very  odd  it  must  have 
seemed,  to  see  so  many  thousands  of  dissimilar  ani- 
mals, spontaneously  emigrating  from  country  and 
kindred;  and  contrary  to  every  impulse  of  instinct 
and  habit,  compassing,  by  one  universal  miracle, 
trackless,  and  almost  immeasurable  distances  of  des- 
ert land  and  ocean,  to  form  the  least  congenial  con- 
gregation, insanity  could  have  dreamed  of;  and  also 
each,  since  any  other  mode  seems  quite  impossible, 
voluntarily  transporting  ten  times  its  weight  of  that 
peculiar  nourishment,  its  adopted  country  would  not 
afford,  nor  yet  an  answerable  substitute?  And  since 
it  seems  to  be  a  law,  amongst  the  carnivorous  tribes, 
that  each  inferior  species,  successively,  shall  become 
the  sustenance  of  its  superior,  how  odd,  to  see  each 
several,  single  pair  or  septenary,  group,  (for  birds, 
however  carniverous  and  foul  were  no  less  cared  for, 
than  delicious  poultry,  and  therefore  saved  in  septen- 
ary pairs,)  how  odd,  I  say,  to  see  them  eachj  and  all, 

12 


9S 

attended  Ly  their  appropriate,  nutrient  herds,  ami 
flocks,  and  swarms  of  living  creatures,  most  unnatu- 
rally and  marvelously  anxious  to  he  eaten  ! 

Omitting  to  notice  any  of  the  thousand,  specific  pe- 
culiarities, by  which  animal  existence  must  have  been 
distinguished.,  in  the  different  climates  and  localities 
of  Asia  and  Africa;  and  the  apparent  inconveniences 
attending  their  sudden  congregation  at  a  single  point 
in  ancient  Armenia,  there  are,  still,  innumerable  cir- 
cumstances, with  which  my  incredulity  is  querulous!}' 
at  issue;  of  which  however,  an  instance  or  two  must 
suffice  our  present  purpose. 

Among  the  many  kinds  of  animals  peculiar  to 
South  America,  which  must  have  been  included  in  the 
diluvian,  salvatory  project,  however  difficultly  accom- 
plished, there  are  four  species  of  Ant-eaters:  Hence 
we  may  reasonably  contemplate  eight  of  them,  ac- 
companied by  countless  millions  of  those  diminutive 
insects,  for  whose  destruction  P.  M.  Roget  &  Co. 
would  declare  these  animals  were  intentionally  and 
especially  created;  and  these  also  attended  by  their 
multiplied  myriads  of  aphides  or  vine-fretters,  no  less 
indispensable  to  their  own  necessities:  For  it  would 
be  preposterous  to  pretend  that  Noah,  in  addition  to 
all  his  other  perplexities,  should  have  been  obliged  to 
hunt  up  ant's  nests  enough  to  provision  these  eight 
gormandizers,  for  the  period  of  a  full  year  after  their 
arrival  in  Armenia !  And,  in  order  to  strengthen  the 
probability  of  the  principal  event,  we  may  also  ima- 
gine those  insectiverous  myrmecophaga,  with  their  in- 
calculably numerous  attendant  insects,  most  provi- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  9$ 

riAo  j/jKiojoaii?  001 

tlcntlv  pioneered,  in    their   seven   days  excursion   of 

j  i  '  r 

more  than  six  thousand  miles,  by  their  enterprising, 
sprightly  compatriot,  the  Sloth;  of  which  it  is  said, 
that  he  is  so  deliberate  in  his  progressive  expeditions, 
as,  having  become  fattened  upon  one  forest  tree,  10 
be  reduced  to  the  last  state  of  emaciation,  while  trav- 
eling to  the  next  one,  though  but  a  few  yards  distant. 
Nor  would  the  Dodo,  of  the  Isle  of  France,  the  literal 
impersonation  of  deformity  and  inactivity,  be  an  un- 
apt commissary  in  such  an  anomulous  enterprise?  In 
what  condition  do  you  think  the  Boa,  Crocadile,  Sloth, 
Ape,  Lion,  Elephant  and]Ostrich,  from  the  hottest  cli- 
mates, would  have  been  found,  at  the  end  of  this 
strange  catastrophe,  and  at  a  point  of  elevation 
marked  by  perpetual  frost?  And  do  you  deem  it  a 
plausible  suggestion,  that  the  White-bear  would  spon- 
taneously prosecute  a  journey,  from  Greenland,  to 
the  interior  of  Asia,  when  he  pants  in  the  sunshine  of 
his  own  polar  zero;  thus,  not  only,  to  be  broiled  in 
the  plains  of  the  Frat  or  the  Kur,  but  to  starve  for 
lack  of  fresh  fish  and  seals,  which  the  deluge  must 
have  rendered  it  particularly  difficult  to  obtain.  The 
Argos-pheasant,  also,  must  have  been  somewhat  diffi- 
cultly sustained,  upon  so  long  a  voyage,  unless  its 
character  has  been  misrepresented:  For  it  is  said  of 
it,  that  it  cannot  be  kept  alive  beyond  a  single  month, 
in  a  state  of  bondage. 

Suppose,  however,  all  these,  and  a  thousand  other 
apparently  impossible  events  to  have  really  occurred; 
and  the  ark,  not  only,  to  have  been  built,  but  fully 
freighted,  consonantly  with  its  reputed  purpose;  and 


,00 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


all  that  heterogeneous  congregation  quietly  nibbling" 
its  several  rations,  in  strange,  promiscuous  harmony — 
it  still  remains  a  problem  of  most  unfeasible  solution, 
how  Noah,  with  his  undisciplined  and  scanty  help, 
could  have  safely  navigated  such  an  unwieldly  enor- 
mity, in  such  a  limitless,  dark  and  boisterous  ocean, 
without  rudder,  anchor,  star  or  compass,  nor  yet, 
have  failed  to  end  his  anomalous  and  erratic  voyage, 
within  the  limits  of  his  own  Armenia.  But  may  be, 
you  are  ready  to  retort,  that  God  was  Noah's  pilot; 
and  hence  the  safety  of  the  ship,  and  prosperity  of 
the  issue!  Then,  in  my  opinion,  God  has  been  much 
more  ingenious  and  successful  in  his  nautical,  than 
spiritual,  affairs! — a  much  better  mariner,  than  meta- 
physician or  legislator;  or  both  Jews  and  Christians 
have  slanderously  misrepresented  Him!  And  again; 
though  theological  credulity  shall  be  able  to  reconcile 
these  preposterous  circumstances,  to  its  peculiar  stand- 
ard of  consistency,  it  would  seem  that,  were  it  not 
early  and  constantly  disciplined  in  swallowing  absurd- 
ities by  the  volume,  it  would  find  itself,  not  a  little, 
perplexed  with  the  state  of  affairs,  inevitably  conse- 
quent upon  the  deluge.  It  must  have  required  much 
more  than  a  mimic  miracle,  to  produce  a  sudden  crop 
of  luxuriant  verdure  from  out  the  mud  and  rock,  the 
flood,  so  lately,  had  abandoned — a  state,  in  which  the 
earth  could  have  been,  scarcely,  more  prolific,  than 
when  it  first  emerged  from  a  primeval  chaos!  And 
Theology,  as  we  have  seen,  at  length  admits  an  epoch, 
of  at  least  a  thousand  years,  to  have  been  expended 
upon  the  earth's  first,  verdant  mantle,  ere  insects, 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS. 


101' 


beasts  and  birds,  the  product  of  such  an  other  epoch, 
were  sent  to  nestle  in  its  folds:  Nor  terminates  the 
difficulty  here! — For,  admitting  vegetable  luxuriance 
to  have,  miraculously,  succeeded  the  deluge,  there 
yet  remains  the  perplexing  consideration,  that  a  great 
proportion  of  Noah's  omnigenous  congregation  was 
carniverous;  and  therefore,  in  the  absence  of  another, 
no  less  miraculous  creation,  than  that  wherein  the  life 
of  animals  originated,  these  imprisoned,  fleshly  feed- 
ers must  have  been  turned  adrift,  with  the  improvi- 
dent and  evil  chance  of  eating  one  another — ending 
thus  the  catastrophe  of  the  fable  !  And  yet,  the  most 
surprising  miracle  of  all  is  unrecounted;  viz.,  that 
God  should  not  have  saved  himself  so  unnatural  and 
perplexing  an  administration  of  his  own  affairs,  as, 
by  a  single  miracle,  to  have  aided  our  first  progeni- 
tors, in  a  successful  resistance  of  the  devil;  nor  left 
them  to  become,  by  disobedience,  so  exactly  like 
himself — and  that  at  such  an  awful  hazard! 

I  have  thus  presented  yon  with  an  inconsiderable 
fraction  of  the  evidence  of  inconsistency  in  the  char- 
acter of  the  Jewish  God,  as  contained  in  his  own  reve- 
lation of  himself.  And  if  more  is  required,  in  order 
to  complete  any  undecided  conviction,  a  general  refer- 
ence may  be  made  to  the  entire  pentateuch,  wherein 
the  greatest  follies  and  the  blackest  crimes  are  abet- 
ted and  enjoined  by  this  personification  of  the  genius 
of  superstition.  And  should  men  be  stigmatized  as 
atheists,  and  thrust  without  the  pale  of  civil  privilege, 
and  protection,  because  their  faith  but  darkly  sees  the 
worth  of  such  a  character;  or  their  reason  has  broke 


02 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISM 


loose  from  traditionary  leading-strings,    nr>; 
its  light  of  supervisorship  ?     The  Indian's  Man 
\vithout  a  doubt,  deserves  as  much  respect  as   this    of 
Israel,  or  as  any  other   extra-mundane    fiction   called 
si  God,  or  by  any  other  name,  that  men   have    chosen 

for  their  ignorance  of  causation  ! 

oittoqo-ui 
Of  an  extra-mundane  God,  of  whom  it  has  been  al- 

ready said,  that  he  would  be  inevitably  as  useless  as 
a  marble  statue,  in  superintending  the  phenomena  of 
the  world,  the  following  additional  remark  may  not 

be  unacceptable,  as  an  illustration. 

* 
Let  me  refer  you  to  that   primitive,    ideal    state    of 

things,  when  universal  chaos  reigned.  —  When  God?s 
omniscience  planned  a  Universe  unlimited  ;  and  his 
omnipoteucy  spoke  it  into  being.  —  When  his  single 
contemplation  must  have  viewed  infinity  of  circum- 
stance and  space,  throughout  an  interminably  revol- 
ving series,  as  though  all  changes,  to  be  thereafter 
wrought,  were  but  as  unity,  in  the  present  tense.  — 
Nor  could  that  contemplation  be  repeated,  since  noth- 
ing new  could  possibly  occur,  to  call  it  into  action. 
One  effort  also  of  omnipotence,  must  have  been  the 
alpha  and  omega  of  God's  determination,  since  that 
must  have  set  the  world's  machinery  effectually  and 
infallibly  in  motion  ;  and  wherein  it  must  resistlessly 
continue  as  long  as  he  shall  have  decreed  it  !  Thus 
we  see  that  such  a  God's  creation  must  have  com- 
menced and  ended  simultaneously,  and  not  progressed 
by  regular  succession  of  time  and  circumstance  : 
And  therefore,  since  he  passed  his  first  decree,  he 

must  have  sat  an  idle  and  a  passive  looker  on   of  all 
i   flown  i;  xti  10  fiwanano  4  do; 


k       THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


the  world's  innumerable  and  inevitable  phenomena: 
Nor  would  his  presence  be  one  whit  less  nugatory, 
than  that  of  him,  who  shall  have  made  a  clock,  to 
measure  out,  with  absolute  precision,  each  moment  of 
a  hundred  years,  and  that  but  with  a  single  winding, 
and  then  should  sit  and  count  the  motions  of  its  pen- 
dulum. 

Would  not  the  hands  of  such  machine  revolve  as 
well,  were  he  who  wrought  them  dead,  as  though  he 
lived  to  watch  the  progress  of  their  uniform  and  per- 
fect revolutions  ?— And  if  thus — wherefore  should 
doubt,  or  disbelief,  of  such  a  character  be  bandied, 
except  from  fool  to  fool,  as  sinfulness  or  reproach  ? 
What  but  Bigotry,  or  Lunacy  would  deem  it  blasphe- 
mous to  say,  that  such  a  God,  whether  of  Gentile, 
Jew,  or  Christian,  is  not  more  useful  than  a  man  of 
straw  ;  nor  more  deserving  of  human  veneration  ? 

But  then  you  say,  perhaps,  that  intelligence  must 
have  been  employed,  in  arranging  the  materials  of 
this  complicated  physical  Universe,  and  the  phenome- 
na,  they  specifically  and  relatively  present.  Intelli- 
gence, therefore,  becomes  the  subject  of  present  and 
particular  inquiry  ;  and  is,  without  a  doubt,  as  far 
as  ordinary  humanity  is  able  to  distinguish,  exclusive- 
ly, an  atribute  of  an  organized,  living  sentient  being, 
in  possession  of  a  brain  and  nervous  system,  and 
consists  in  a  more  or  less  clear  perception  of  the  phe- 
nomena of  Nature,  and  the  several  relations  existing 
among  them  :  And  hence  the  brain,  and  not  the 
heart,  should  be  contemplated,  as  the  exclusive  in- 
strument of  mind,  thought  or  soul  j  and  this,  wheth- 


104  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 


cr  consciousness  result  from  organic 
from  a  more  or  less  successful  effort  of  the  soul  to 
display  itself,  through  the  vulgar  medium  of  physical 
organism.  And,  whatever  the  mode  of  operation,  it 
is  already  the  settled  opinion  of  all  educated  persons, 
that  the  better  developed,  the  more  healthy,  and  the 
better  disciplined  and  sustained,  is  this  cranial  or 
psychological  machinery,  the  clearer,  and  more  ele- 
vated, is  the  intellectual  product  or  functional  intel- 
ligence, it  displays. 

In  these  respects,  thought  and  locomotion  possess 
a  parallel  character,  both  being  alike  embarrassed  by 
defective,  or  unhealthy,  organism,  or  deficient,  or  ex- 
cessive exercise. 

The  idea  of  thought  existing  abstractly  from  a  brain, 
would  be  no  less  preposterous,  than  that  of  animal 
motion,  unconnected  with  muscular  developement. 
A  brainless  philosopher,  and  an  agile  skeleton  would 
be  equally  strange  phenomena.  In  fine,  it  appears  to 
me  quite  impossible  to  conceive  of  mind,  or  soul, 
but  as  an  attribute  or  function  of  organized,  living, 
animal  matter.  And  hence  it  follows,  that  deity,  in 
order  to  posses  the  attribute  of  intelligence,  should 
be  also  in  possession  of  a  brain,  or  some  other  appro- 
•priate,  physical  organ,  through  which  intelligence, 
mind,  or  soul,  may  be  displayed,  or  by  which  it  may 
be  generated.  It  appears,  therefore,  incontrovertible, 
that  the  intelligence  of  God  must  be  animal  intelli- 
gence, or  that,  of  which  mankind  can  have  no  man- 
ner of  conception:  And  hence  the  theist  cannot  es- 
cape the  vexatious  dilemma,  that  his  God  is  clothed 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


106 


with  human  attributes,  or  with  none  at  all,  as  far  a» 
he  can  apprehend.  And  do  you  think  the  former 
kind,  which  is  scarcely  adequate,  at  best,  to  the  or- 
dinary exigences  of  temporal  humanity,  well  befitting 
the  creator  and  director  of  a  world's  affairs  ?  Nor 
can  the  difficulty  be  at  all  obviated,  by  the  vulgar, 
senseless  expedient,  of  annexing  the  term,  infinite, 
to  this,  or  any  other,  imputed  attribute  of  God.  For 
this  adjective,  like  the  subject,  it  is  so  often  used  to 
qualify,  however  convenient,  or  indespensable,  use 
may  have  rendered  it,  means  neither  more  nor  less, 
than  an  indefinite  extension  of  its  substantive,  beyond 
the  limits  of  human  apprehension:  And  in  every 
case  in  which  it  is  used,  it  is  exactly  synonymous  with 
an  acknowledgement  of  total  ignorance  of  what  it  is 
intended  to  express.  Therefore,  whoever  speaks  of 
wisdom,  power  and  goodness,  as  attributes  of  God, 
whether  qualified  by  the  nugatory  adjective,  infinite, 
or  not,  is  manufacturing  a  deity  of  the  attributes  of 
mere  humanity.  And  here  you  will  allow  me  to  ask 
againsWho  else  but  fool  or  lunatic  would  kneel  in  pious 
veneration,  to  so  uncomely  and  so  strange  a  vagary  : 

The  difficulty  upon  this  question  seems  to  depend 
upon  the  fallacy  of  confounding  an  attribute  of  mere 
humanity,  and  one  in  no  inconsiderable  degree  com- 
mon to  men  and  beast?,  denominated  intelligence, 
with  the  adaptiveness  or  consistency  of  Nature,  of 
which  this  same  human  intelligence  is  a  constituent; 
man  himself  being  a  part  of  her  physical  system,  and 
employed  in  the  performance  of  her  functions. 

And  were  I  indulged  a  moment  for   recapitulation, 

13 


106  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

1  would  express  my  own  belief  of  God  and   his    intel- 
ligence, in  the  language  of  the  following  theorems. 

First,  That  the  original  idea  of  God  is  universally 
and  unexceptionably  the  same,  with  all  mankind, 
who  are  endowed  with  the  ordinary  powers  and  op- 
portunities of  reflection;  and  that  it  is  identical  with 
that  of  inherent,  primitive,  or  ultimate  causality,  and 
spontaneously  engendered  in  the  mind  of  every  in- 
quirer after  the  causes  of  things.  And  thus,  is  the 
only  plausible  notion  of  atheism  completely  invalida- 
ted— no  man  being  obnoxious  to  the  epithet,  who  is 
able  to  contemplate  the  existence  of  an  unknown 
cause:  Upon  which  point,  the  savage  and  the  sage 
are  nearly  equal  competitors;  both  infallibly  attaining 
their  goal,  but  by  different  steps,  and  unequal  des- 

Second.  That  natural  Theology  affords  no  other 
evidence,  or  knowledge  of  Deity,  than  that  of  mere 
abstract  existence,  obtained  by  induction  whilst  in- 
vestigating the  relation  of  cause  and  effect.  And  that 
nothing  more  can  ever  be  known  upon  the  subject, 
except  by  the  assistance  of  supernatural  revelation. 

Third.  That  intelligence,  as  applied  to  God,  is  al- 
together void  of  meaning,  or  palpably  slanderous  of 
his  imputed  omnisciency;  and  cannot  be  theologically 
employed  without  the  basest  irreverence,  or,  the 
deepest  stupidity.  It  would,  nevertheless,  be  striking- 
ly absurd,  to  utter  an  explicit  denial  of  the  intelli- 
gence of  God,  or  causality,  which  it  is  not  man's 
province  to  determine;  but  it  is  his  right  to  insist  up- 
on the  truth  of  the  proposition,  that  human  apprehen- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  10 


So, 


sion  cannot,  in  any  conceivable  manner,  apply  itself 
to  the  subject  of  infinite  wisdom,  admitting  such  wis- 
dom to  exist.  Nor  is  it  possible  for  mankind  to  ac- 
quire any  definite  idea  of  the  existence  of  any  other 
intelligence,  affection,  or  propensity,  than  that  which 
is  displayed  by  living  animals.  Thus,  are  men  stig- 
matized, as  infidels  and  atheists,  because  they  st>> 
and  own  their  ignorance  of  all  beyond  the  pale  of 
time  and  things,  and  humbly  jaeld,  to  God  or  Nature, 
the  sole  direction  of  superhuman  incidents — Mean- 
while, the  human  egotist,  who  assumes  to  be  famil- 
iar with  the  privacies  of  God,  and  with  the  undevel- 
oped circumstances  of,  perhaps,  a  ficticious  future 
state  of  being;  and  who,  both  night  and  morning,  im- 
pudently asks  his  God,  to  shape  His  providence,  to 
his  own  immediate,  particular  occasions;  or,  at  least 
reminds  Him  of  the  duty  of  looking  carefully  to  His 
own  affairs,  is  eulogized  as  a  model  of  huiuu  :! :yj  and 
as  a  very  pink  of  piety  and  wisdom.  Nor  aie  vanity 
and  impudence  the  only  faults,  that  reason  charges 
upon  such  pharisaic  holiness.  She  hears  them  confi- 
dently reiterate  the  purest  Gospel-precepts,  as  though 
they  were  themselves  the  Logos,  whence  they  came, 
and,  meanwhile,  hourly  contradict  them  by  their  base 
examples. — She  also  hears  their  daily,  formal  prayers, 
in  which  they  ask  their  God  to  be  a  benefactor  to  the 
poor — to  feed  the  hungry  and  clothe  the  na^ed;  nor 
even  dream  that  God  has  made  them  stewards  of  :i 
bounty,  He  intended  should  be  thus  appropriated ; 
And  hence  she  tells  her  votaries,  that  there  is  some 
thing  wrong,  or  rotten,  in  the  system  of  theology. 


,0* 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


.      ,  -        .  •         ,  •  IMMUfll  ftkUnrifMM  MM     , 

And  for  this,  she  and  they  are  slandered  and  con- 
demned as  miscreants,  and  fearful  agents  of  the  ad- 
versary, in  the  diabolical  project  of  both  temporal 
and  eternal  ruin:  Nor  has  she  ever  ventured  a  com- 
ment upon  its  absurdities,  even  those,  which  itself 
has  subsequently  discarded,  in  shame  for  their  very 
ugliness,  but  that  superstition  has,  forthwith,  perse- 
cuted her  from  Dan  to  Beersheba  and  back  again; 
nor  relaxed  in  her  severities,  until  by  tortures,  and 
oaths  of  extermination,  the  exhausted  and  dishearten- 
ed heritic  has  been  made  to  utter  a  heartless  recanta- 
tion. 

Nor  has  the  cry  of  heresy,  blasphemy,  infidelity 
and  atheism,  ever  failed  to  be  raised  against  the  vota- 
ries of  Reason,  who  have  dared  to  inculcate  her  sug- 
gestions of  the  deformities  of  Popery,  and  even  of 
Judaism  itself;  nor  have  its  echoes  ceased,  wherever 
Superstition  has  set  its  cloven  hoof,  since  Seth  and 
Enos,  lucklessly,  mistook  causation  for  a  God:  But 
even  here,  in  this  focus  of  discordant  spiritualism,  or. 
as  discourtesy  might  say ,  this  menagere  of  biped  ani- 
mals, where  precept  and  example  are  hot  at  logger- 
heads, and  vociferously  bandying  the  lie,  in  each 
other's  teeth,  Superstition  is  already  getting  hoarse 
with  brawling  of  its  danger  and  its  infallibility. 

Thus  you  see  I  have  thrown  the  gauntlet  to  Juda- 
jsm,  and  the  superstitions  of  Christianity;  nor  intend 
ever  to  resume  it,  whilst  I  retain  the  power  to  wield 
either  tongue  or  pen,  in  what  I  deem  a  most  holy, 
contest — a  contest  of  Reason  and  Truth  and  Amity 
against  Lunacy,  Error  and  murderous  Dissension. 

But  lest  I  should  be    mistaken  for  a  disorganizer — 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  109 

a  civil  and  moral  nuisance — an  abettor  of  crime,  and 
an  advocate  of  licentiousness,  I  must  beg  your  atten- 
tion to  the  following  avowal. 

I  hold  to  equal,  and  mutual  rights,  privileges,  and 
responsibilities,  among  all  persons,  of  all  countries, 
and  of  all  colors;  and  that  it  is  the  especial  duty  of 
each  individual  in  every  community,  to  act  conscien- 
tiously, or  in  accordance  with  the  suggestions  of  rea- 
son, uninfluenced  by  personal  considerations,  by  preju- 
dice or  partiality — or  by  the  fear  of  consequences,  to 
persons  or  characters;  and,  meanwhile,  aim  to  make 
the  greatest  possible  contributions  to  the  common 
stock  of  human  happiness. 

I  hold  that  the  moral  precepts  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment should  be  adopted,  as  the  standard  of  rectitude 
among  mankind,  until  an  unquestionably  better  sys- 
tem shall  have  been  obtained.  And  that  the  Gospel 
can  never  become  seriously  objectionable,  until  its 
precepts  shall  have  been  surpassed  by  the  excellence 
of  human  conduct;  of  which  disparagement,  it  a|j- 
pears  in  no  immediate  danger. 

I  hold,  that  Legislation  should  seek  to  elevate  the 
character  and  promote  the  welfare  of  its  subjects, 
with  the  least  possible  infringement  of  the  principle 
of  reciprocity;  being  itself  obedient  to  those  institu- 
tions of  Nature,  that  regard  the  production,  preserva- 
tion, usefulness  and  happiness  of  the  human  race. 

And  were  there  a  power,  that  I  could  successfully 
invoke,  I  would  become  a  wrestling  Jacob,  until  I 
were  blessed  with  the  happy  consciousness,  of  having 
fully  exemplified  the  purity  of  the  Gospel,  in.  my  own 
daily  practices. 


LECTURE  IV. 

INFIDELITY    AND    RELIGIOUS    FAITH    CRITICALLY 
EXAMINED,    AND    COMPARED. 

Infidelity,  or  unbelief,  in  its  religious  acceptation, 
is  a  disbelief  of  the  supernatural  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  or  of  the  superhuman  origin  of  Christian- 
ity! whilst  the  opposite  should,  of  course,  be  received 
as  the  definition  of  religious  faith. 

Since  Nature  is  entirely  barren  of  testimony  in  fa- 
vor of  theology,  anil  further  than  the  inductive  con- 
viction, she  enforces,  of  the  existence  of  an  ultimate 
cause,  which  we  have  considered,  heretofore,  as  iden- 
tical with  God  the  creator,  mankind  have  found  it 
convenient  to  introduce,  upon  this  question,  the  testi- 
mony of  a  reputed  divine  revelation.  And,  upon 
this,  I  believe  the  utmost  reliance  is  almost  universal- 
ly placed.  If,  therefore,  it  should  fail  to  sustain  it- 
self, under  the  severest  scrutiny,  Theology  will  be 
inevitably  exposed  in  its  naked  decrepitude;  and  ab- 
horred for  its  digusting  deformities:  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  if  it  is  marked  with  the  consistency  and  infalli- 
bility of  the  laws  of  Nature,  it  will  grow  brighter  by 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS.  Ill 

collision,  and  more  and  more  conspicuous  by  the  tests 
to  which  it  is  submitted.  And  were  I  a  disciple  of 
revealed  religion,  I  would  solicit,  and  even  provoke, 
discussion  upon  the  question  of  supernatural  revela- 
tion, until  the  infidel  shall  have  relinquished  the  last 
hook,  upon  which  to  hang  even  the  shadow  of  an  ob- 
jection; glorying,  meanwhile,  in  my  increasing  confi- 
dence of  the  truth,  as  my  adversary  shall  have  re- 
treated from  the  field  of  contest. 

When  have  men  fallen  to  loggerheads,  about  the 
permanency  of  the  laws  of  Nature?  Or  whether 
they  were  in  danger  of  being  obstructed  or  perverted 
by  the  fallacy  of  human  opinion?  Have  they  not 
proceeded  with  the  same  regularity  and  results,  what- 
ever opinion  mankind  have  maintained  of  them? 
And,  were  Theology  of  a  similar  character,  would  it 
surrender  its  dominion  over  the  opinions  of  men. 
sooner  than  gravitation  over  his  physical  corporality? 

Revelation  is,  nevertheless,  believed  to  be,  in  tech- 
nical phrase,  a  noli  me  tangere,  or  touch  me  not — a 
sanctum  sanctorum,  or  holy  of  holies,  wherein  the 
profanity  of  human  reason  is,  peremptorily,  forbid- 
den to  enter,  lest  it  should  corrupt  the  savor  of  holi- 
ness, or  be  itself  extinguished,  for  its  sacrilegious  te- 
merity. But  then  again,  the  laws  of  Nature,  which 
Theology  admits  to  be  the  institutions  of  God,  are, 
in  no  wise,  impaired  by  the  closest  examination;  and 
wherefore  revelation  should  be  more  endangered, 
from  a  similar  scrutiny,  is  a  question  of  no  easy  solu- 
tion, unless  it  is  itself  a  fiction. 

The  truth  of  revelation,  or  the  supernatural  char- 


112  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

acter  of  the  Scriptures,  therefore,  offers  itself  for  ex- 
amination: An  enterprise  so  full  of  danger,  if  not  of 
difficulty,  that  less  than  the  temerity  of  martyrdom 
would  cower  at  the  enunciation  of  its  terrible  threat- 
enings.  It  is  deemed  an  unhallowed  encroachment 
upon  the  sanctuary  of  the  holy  mountain,  which  The- 
ology has  fenced  about  with  a  mysterious  sanctity  that 
pales  the  face  of  the  most  dauntless  intruder.  A 
critical  inquiry  into  the  divinity  of  revelation  is,  at 
any  time,  a  desperate  undertaking,  and  affords  a  prac- 
tical illustration  of  the  language  ^of  the  author  of 
Christianity,  wherein  he  exclaims,i>"  Think  not  that  I 
am  come  to  send  peace  on  earth:  I  came  not  to  send 
peace,  but  a  sword.  For  I  am  come  to  set  a  man  at 
variance  ;  -;  father,  and  the  daughter  against 

her  mother,^  tec. — a  declaration  that  every  page  of 
Christian  history  has  fully  verified.  And  thus,  inno- 
vation upon  established  prejudices  has  always  done! 
But  if,  as  the  present  opinion  is,  God  permits  man- 
kind to  examine,  and  speculate  upon  his  works — 
wherefore  should  his  word  be  excluded  from  the  same 
ordeal.'  Would  God  have  promulgated  a  sentiment 
or  a  principle,  for  the  theological,  moral  or  political 
direction  of  mankind,  less  infallible,  in  truth  and  ef- 
fect, than  are  the  laws  that  govern  the  inorganic 
world?  I  Whence,  then,  the  cowardly  dread  that  the 
word  of  God  is  in  danger  of  being  subverted:  But 
perhaps  the  disciple  of  Christianity  deprecates  the 
temporary  evils  of  Infidelity  upon  the  weak  and 
credulous,  during  a  contest  in  which  the  latter  shall 
be  finally  overcome?  iO  (aoil«to?n  10  fi; 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  113 

This  is,  nevertheless,  an  unjustifiable  fear;  since 
the  path  to  Christian  conversion  must  be  constantly, 
if  not  fatally,  obstructed,  until  every  stumbling-block 
to  scepticism  shall  have  been  effectually  removed. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  collision,  until  Theological, 
shall  vie  with  mathematical,  truth,  in  the  clearness  of 
its  demonstrations — when  man  shall  be  again  admit- 
ted to  a  personal  interview  with  his  maker;  nor  be 
cheated  of  the  certainty  of  truth,  of  all  the  most  mo- 
mentous, through  the  fallacious  medium  of  human  in- 
terpretation. And  here,  I  must  solicit  your  patience, 
while  I  speak  a  few  words,  in  explanation  of  my  own 
particular  predicament. 

Notwithstanding  the  notoriety  of  my  irreligion. 
which  I  have  never  shrunk  from  declaring,  whenever 
solicited,  with  a  frankness  that  ought  to  have  vouched, 
at  least,  for  my  sincerity,  I  have  succeeded  in  acqui- 
ring the  friendship  and  patronage  of  a  great  number 
of  individuals,  and  mostly  too  of  Christian  denomina- 
tions, whose  acquaintance  any  man  might  have  been 
proud  to  share;  but,  I  may  be  allowed  to  say,  upon 
this  particular  occasion,  that  I  have,  nevertheless, 
been,  more  than  any  other  individual  of  rny  acquaint- 
ance, the  object  of  an  unremitted,  relentless  and  big- 
oted persecution,  for  more  than  thirty  years;  and 
after  all,  am,  at  this  moment,  enjoying  the  compensa- 
tory reflection,  that  I  have  contemptuously  rejected 
hundreds  of  solicitations  to  place  myself,  even  in  the 
foremost  ranks  of  Christian  communities;  and  that  1 
have  also  resisted  as  many  temptations  to  secure  my 

14 


114  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

temporal  prosperity,   at  the  sacrifice  of  both  my  rea- 
son and  conscience. 

But  then  the  oddest  point  in  this  long  history  of 
bloodless  persecution  is,  that  after  thirty  years  of 
frank  avowal  of  my  scepticism,  the  tug  of  war,  with 
murderous  Bigotry,  shall  hare  but  now  arrived.  And 
wherefore  all  my  Christian  friends  should  deem  me 
closer  leagued  with  Satan  now,  than  at  any  former 
day  of  thirty  years,  is  beyond  my  feeble  power  of 
divination.  My  principles  were  drawn,  like  theirs, 
from  Gospel  infallibility,  wherein  my  spirit  has  been 
daily  schooled,  from  childhood  onward:  And  though 
its  warfare  with  the  flesh  has  proved  its  discipline  de- 
fective, nor  made  my  case,  in  this  respect,  at  all  pe- 
culiar; is  it  reasonable  to  fear,  that  wear  and  tear 
have  made  me  more  licentious? 

But  when  my  friends,  in  tearful  sorrow  for  my 
waywardness,  shall  threaten  to  withdraw  their  friend- 
ship and  their  patronage,  in  conformity  with  the  plain 
injunctions  of  a  Christian  conscience,  and  prescribed 
allegiance  to  the  infinite  source  of  merciful  forgive- 
ness; I  have  but  one  reply  to  such  denounemejit; 
which  is:  However  dearly  I  esteem  the  affection  of 
my  friends,  and  that  can  scarcely  be  suspected,  in  one, 
who  honestly  declares  his  willingness  to  yield  his  life 
in  sacrifice  for  the  welfare  of  his  foes.  I  cannot  hesi- 
tate, in  the  arbitrary  and  unnatural  dilemma,  wherein 
my  friends,  or  liberty,  must  be  relinquished.  You 
know  'tis  base,  contemptibly  base,  that  man  should 
enter  into  voluntary  slavery  to  his  fellow  man;  but 
that  'tis  baser  still,  except  by  moral  suasion,  to  at- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  115 

tempt  to  modify  a  single  thought:  But  then,  all  other 
baseness  may,  comparatively,  assume  the  name  of 
virtue,  when  contrasted  with  that  low  sycophancy, 
that  would  purchase  favor  with  its  self  respect — a 
baseness  inexpressible  by  any  epithets  afforded  by  our 
language.  And  then  suppose  that  penury,  with  its 
hungry  importunity  and  rags,  should  drive  me  to  a 
base  relinquishment  of  libeity  and  self  respect,  for 
patronage  and  friendship.  What  magnanimity  in 
friendship  thus  developed,  thus  obtained  and  thus  di- 
rected ?  Moral  putrefaction  would  be  a  savor  of  right- 
eousness in  comparison !  But  enough  of  this  un- 
comely egotism,  which  nothing  but  apparent  necessi- 
ty would  have  elicited.  The  question  of  supernatu- 
ralism  is  much  more  worthy  of  my  labor,  and  your 
attention. 

The  scriptures  purport  to  be  a  divine  revelation 
from  God  to  man;  and  in  this  assumption,  the  popu- 
lation of  Christendom,  almost  unanimously  concur. 
And  in  order  to  frighten  incredulity,  and  even  timidi- 
ty into  acquiescence,  Imposture  has  set  its  seal  there- 
on, engraven  with  a  denunciation  of  the  unbeliever  ; 
and  damnation  to  him  that  doubts.  But  to  this  par- 
ticular point,  whatever  the  imputed  heresy,  the  Ameri- 
can citizen,  white  or  black,  male  or  female,  should 
not  hesitate  to  speak  with  a  frankness,  emphasis  and 
boldness,  persuasive  of  his  sincerity,  and  his  proud 
consciousnes  of  personal  liberty.  And  here,  in  the 
unbending  spirit  of  reciprocal  and  impartial  freedom, 
I  venture  to  enunciate  my  irrevocable  curse  upon 
cowardice,  and  blush  to  think,  how  many  Jonahs 


116  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

arc  my  brethren.  Yes,  to  be  frightened  into  a  relin- 
quishment  of  one's  opinion,  by  threat*  purporting  to 
be  either  from  God  or  man,  is  a  base  servility,  to 
which  an  upright, manly  consciousness  can  never  bend: 
Nor  i.s  there  more  than  seeming  heresy  in  this  re- 
mark: For  it  is  a  truth,  no  one  can  hope  to  contro- 
vert, that  a  God  can?iot,  and  that  man  should  not,  be 
unreasonable. 

The  disciples  of  Christianity  are,  or  ought  to  be, 
fully  conscious,  that  both  the  supernatural  ami  literal 
characters  of  the  scriptures  have  been  subjects  of 
censorious  controversy  for  many  hundred  years: 
For  that  an  occasional  individual,  has  oroke  loose 
from  the  restraints  of  traditionary  superstition,  and 
with  a  temerity  that  defied  persecution,  promulgated 
his  heresies  in  the  teeth  of  a  retaliatory,  malignant 
and  fashionable  theology.  Nor  does  the  question  ap- 
pear, at  present,  to  be  any  nearer  settled,  than  at 
any  former  period  of  the  protracted  contest.  Chris- 
tians ought  not,  therefore,  arbitrarily,  to  impose  upon 
an  opponent,  a  series  of  essays,  as  indisputable  au- 
thority, whose  character  and  import  have  been  a  sub- 
ject of  interminable,  malevolent  dissention,  even 
among  themselves. 

Were  the  truth  of  biWical  divinity  susceptible  of 
demonstration,  or  even  of  plausible  support,  by  ex- 
trinsic circumstances,  or  intrinsic  consistency,  it 
would,  assure  lly,  have  been,  long  since,  shorn  of  its 
countless  horns,  upon  which  Scepticism  has,  so  long 
and  securely,  hung  its  myriads  of  objections.  But  to 
the  great  annoyance  of  its  disciples,  those  horns  have 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS.  117 

grown  more   numerous   and   conspicuous,  as   science  ' 
has  dispersed  the  darkness  in  which  they  were  gener- 
ated. 

Whenever  testimony  is  demanded  of  the  truth  of 
divine  revelation,  the  inquirer  having  been  firstly 
presented  with  a  motley  preface  of  hems  and  haws, 
of  grins  and  grimaces,  of  groans  and  grumblings  at 
the  absurdity  and  even  sinfulness  of  such  a  query,  is 
finally  referred  to  what  are  denominated  prophecy 
and  miracles  for  a  demonstration  of  its  validity;  as 
though  the  most  unlikely,  if  not  impossible,  things  in 
nature,  were  to  be  credited  as  self-evident  truths. 
These  are  propositions  which  Nature  abhors  and  Phi- 
losophy detests — which  cultivated  reason  indignantly 
spurns;  and  to  which,  nothing  but  the  darkest  super- 
stition, or  the.  wildest  mysticism  can  be  made  to  as- 
sent. And  yet  in  these  palpable  fallacies,  slanders  of 
Nature,  and  mockeries  of  her  consistency,  there  js 
something  that  may  be  seriously,  but  mournfully, 
contemplated.  One  truth,  at  least,  is  included  in 
these  propositions,  which  must  not  only  be  admitted, 
but  is  doubtless  deserving  an  explanation;  viz.,  the 
almost  universal  conviction  of  their  validity. 

It  is  not  to  be  doubted,  that  the  probability  of  very 
many  future,  or  anticipated,  events,  may  have  been 
very  clearly  apprehended  by  many  of  the  Jewish, 
Pagan  and  Christian  moralists  and  politicians,  and 
accordingly  promulgated,  in  the  language  of  positive 
assurance;  by  which  ignorant  credulity  may  have 
been  successfully  imposed  upon,  and  a  positive 
knowledge  of  future  events  very  naturally  supposed 


113  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

to  exist,  in  the  character  of  an  undefinable,  supernat- 
ural state,  or  kind,  of  human  consciousness. 

Those  nominal  prophecies,  of  whatever  date,  place 
or  character,  were,  doubtless,  more  or  less  rational 
inductions  from  known  moral  or  political  circumstan- 
ces, and  generally  promulgated,  especially  among  the 
Hebrews,  in  the  imaginative  spirit  and  style  of  an- 
tique poetry:  But  however  legitimately  and  success- 
fully they  may  have  been  deduced  from  substantial 
premises,  they  must,  nevertheless,  have  been,  and 
remained,  mere  matters  of  faith,  and  not  of  fact,  un- 
til their  actual  transpiration  shall  have  given  them  a 
palpable  and  indisputable  existance:  For  the  most 
confident  and  reasonable  expectation  of  an  event, 
can  never  be  identical  with  its  certainty.  An  event 
in  prospect  is  not  an  event  in  fact:  And  whatever 
has  not  already  assumed  the  character  of  a  specific 
phenomenon,  possesses  no  other  identity  than  that  of 
an  idea,  in  the  mind  of  the  projector :  Therefore,  pheno- 
mena, not  yet  transpired,  are  no  phenomena  at  all;  and 
however  probable  their  occurrence,  cannot  make  any 
part  of  the  positive  knowledge  of  mankind.  They 
are,  therefore,  to  be  guessed  at,  as  the  nearest  ap- 
proach to  certainty. 

To  doubt  that  the  sun  will  rise  tomorrow,  would 
be  justly  deemed  insanity-,  and  yet  it  is  equally  ab- 
surd to  think  we  know  it  will.  Water  has  hitherto, 
when  left  to  the  law  of  gravitation,  invariably  run 
down  hill,  and  nothing  appears  more  likely,  than  that 
it  will  continue  thus  to  do;  but  to  know  the  fact,  is 
not  an  attribute  of  ordinary  humanity. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  119 

The  difference,  therefore,  between  knowledge  and 
belief,  is  too  palpable  to  be  mistaken;  and  may  be 
seen  to  consist  in  this — while  the  former  depends  ex- 
clusively upon  nn  especial  cxamination,and  accurate  ap- 
prehension of  the  fact  iiself;  the  latter  is  a  in  ere  deduc- 
tion from  other  facts,  to  which  the  particular  fact  in 
question  is  supposed  to  stand  in  a  logical  relation. 
And  so  of  the  events  of  prophecy,  which  must  have 
existed  in  the  mind  of  the  prophet,  as  more  or  less 
distinct  anticipations,  produced  by  a  course  of  reflec- 
tion upon  the  relation  existing  between  apparent 
causes  and  unapparent  effects. 

It  appears  entirely  incontrovertible,  whatever  at- 
tempts may  have  been  made  to  invalidate  it,  that  no 
idea  was  ever  acquired,  but  by  the  collision  of  some 
external  circumstance  with  an  organ  of  sense,  or  by 
reflecting  upon  ideas  already  thus  acquired:  Or  in 
other  words,  we  have  no  means  of  direct  knowledge, 
except  by  the  aid  of  our  senses,  and  that  too  by  their 
direct  application  to  the  objects  of  inquiry,  or  to  their 
representatives;  or  of  indirect,  or  inductive,  knowl- 
edge, except  by  judicious  reflection  upon  the  relations 
and  tendencies  of  such  objects,  or  upon  the  ideas  they 
shall  have  created. 

There  is  perhaps  no  greater  absurdity  in  Nature, 
than  the  idea  that  mind  can  anticipate  thought.  Mind 
and  thought  are  synonymous,  and  therefore  converti- 
ble terms. — Hence  it  would  be  no  less  absurd  to  say, 
that  mind  thinks,  while  that  very  contemplation  is 
mind  itself,  than  to  say  that  thought  thinks,  or  that 
motion  moves. 


120  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

It  is  true,  that  mind  has  been  erroneously  interpre- 
ted as  the  instrument  of  thought,  which  appears  to  be 
an  injudicious  epithet  for  brain,  that  is  now  recog- 
nized, by  all  educated  persons,  as  the  exclusive  psy- 
chological apparatus.  In  this  manner,  cause  and  ef- 
lect  are  palpably  confounded,  and  the  function  of  an 
organ  mistaken  for  the  organ  itself.  Mind  is  as  clear- 
ly an  organic  function  as  muscular  motion;  both  be- 
ing phenomena,  produced  by  irresistible  impulse  up- 
on the  thinking  and  motive  organs.  Nor  can  either 
brain  or  muscle  excite  itself  to  action. — They  must 
passively  await  the  presence  of  excitation,  without 
which  neither  would  ever  act: 

To  speak  physiologically:  Man  is  an  aggregate  of 
complicated  organism,  which  is  so  arranged  as  that, 
whilst  each  individual  organic  structure  possesses  a 
specific  identity  and  functionality,  the  whole  are  as- 
sociated by  means  of  vascular  and  nervous  intercom- 
munication, into  an  individual,  living,  thinking,  ac- 
ting machine,  whose  phenomena  are  either  psycho- 
logical or  automatic,  or,  in  other  words,  voluntary 
or  involuntary;  with  the  former  of  which  only,  are 
we  at  present  concerned. 

A  voluntary  action  is  that  which  occurs  in  conso- 
nance with,  and  as  an  impulse  of,  the  will,  and  is  pri- 
marily produced  in  the  following  manner-,  viz. — An 
appropriate  external  stimulus  is  presented  to  a  heal- 
thy organ  of  sensation;  whence  a  corresponding  im- 
pulse is  received  by  the  nerves,  or  sentient  medium 
between  the  world  and  consciousness;  which  impulse 
being  transmitted  to  the  brain,  a  corresponding  con- 
sciousness, idea  or  perception  is,  at  once,  developed. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  121 

Nor  can  I  apprehend  any  other  mode,  by  which  an 
original,  or  primitive,  idea  can  have  been  ever  ac- 
quired. And  yet,  this  primitive  idea  may  become  it- 
self an  efficient  stimulus  to  thought— an  adequate 
substitute  for  physical  impulse,  in  the  development  of 
any  formal  series  of  reflections.  And  beside  these, 
there  seems  to  be  no  natural  and  apprehensible  mode 
of  inducing  the  state  denominated  consciousness. 
What,  therefore,  is  apparently  more  innocent  or  judi- 
cious, than  an  inquiry  after  the  peculiar  mode  by 
which  a  reputed  supernatural  idea  may  have  been  ac- 
quired? But  upon  this  question,  or  rather  this  para- 
doxical fatuity,  Philosophy  frowns  contemptuously, 
whilst  all  Nature  is  as  mute  as  vacancy  itself.  No  ! 
never  has  she  whispered  a  thing  so  senseless  as  su- 
pernatural revelation;  nor  practiced  the  servility  of 
owning  a  superior.  And  is  not  man,  at  best,  a  hum- 
ble part  of  this  same  adaptive,  systematic  Nature? 
And  what  is  all  his  aggregate  biography,  but  a  single 
paragraph  of  her  voluminous  and  interminable  histo- 
ry? Can  he,  a  mere  instrument,  like  a  pair  of  pin- 
cers.in  his  mother's  hand,  with  which  to  work  her 
purposes,  successfully  aspire  to  that  which  she  has 
not  intended  ?  That  humanity  can  acquire  a  thought, 
above  what  Nature  can  suggest,  is  a  fallacy,  at  which 
reflecting  infancy  should  sneer.  Prophecy,  therefore, 
can  never  have  been,  at  best,  any  thing  more  than  an 
expression  of  opinion  relative  to  an  anticipated  event, 
of  which  known  circumstances  appeared  to  the  repu- 
ted seer,  to  indicate  a  greater  or  less  probability : 
For,  as  we  have  already  heard,  certainty  with  man, 

15 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


pertains  to  nothing  which  has  not  yet  transpired;  and 
even  of  that,  he  is  too  often  conscious  of  misappre- 
hension, not  to  distrust  the  infallibility  of  his  senae> 
It  seems  to  be  high  time,  therefore,  that  the  stultify- 
ing phantasm,  prophetic,  or  supernatural,  inspiration. 
was  effectually  exploded,  and  intellect  disenthralled 
from  its  superstitious  servility.  Nor  does  it  seem  less 
derogatory  to  cultivated  common  sense,  that  mankind 
should  admit  the  occurrence  of  phenomena,  independ- 
ent and  transcendental  of  Nature's  laws. 

It  is  said,  that  God  wrought  miracles,  in  aid  of  Ju- 
daism, and  of  the  subjugation  and  extermination  of 
those  who  ventured  an  opposition  to  Hebrew  robbery 
and  dominion.?  And  what,  meanwhile,  became  of  his 
omnisciency,  that  he  should  have  wholly  overlooked 
rliose  palpable  defects,  in  both  the  ethics  and  theology 
of  Judaism,  for  which  a  few  years  after,  he  found  it 
indispensable  to  substitute  the  novel  system  called 
Christianity?  And  did  that  project  prove  abortive, 
which  a  senior  God  had  instituted,  especially,  for  the 
Jew,  and  which  a  junior  God  was  miraculously  com- 
missioned to  enforce?  And  did  God  waste  a  world 
of  pains,  in  this  and  various  other  ways-,  upon  His 
peculiar  people,  until  His  undisguised  partiality  be- 
came a  by-word  of  reproach,  and  a  plausible  excuse 
for  atheism;  and  then,  alas,  resign  them  up,  with  ap- 
propriate denunciations,  to  His  satanic-  adversary  for 
both  temporal  and  eternal  ruin  ?  And  did  he  not  al- 
low the  only  Theocracy  on  earth,  the  only  govern- 
ment, be  ever,  personalty,  administered,  to  be  sub 
verteJ,  and  its  subjects,  who  bad  long  basked  in  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  123 

egotizing  beams  of  culpable  partiality,  to  be  persecu- 
ted, dispersed,  enslaved  and  murdered,  by  the  samo 
pagan  idolaters  as  had  been  the  particular  objects  of 
His  almighty  vengeance?  Now,  do  you  seriously  be- 
lieve in  the  existence  of  such  a  god,  or  in  his  power 
to  interrupt  or  modify  the  laws  of  Nature;  and  that 
for  purposes  so  fatuous  or  vile,  that  common  justice 
deprecates,  and  cammon  sense  detests,  them?  And 
would  a  god  like  this,  be  fully  competent  to  direct  a 
world's  phenomena,  so  broad,  so  limitless,  that  this 
whole  system  called  our  own,  is,  comparatively,  a 
single  atom?  But  these  comparisons  are  nugatory, 
since  such  a  god  could  not  produce  a  spear  of  grass, 
nor  scarcely  tell  it  from  a  turnip. 

It  is  also  said,  that  God  wrought  miracles  in  order 
to  convince  mankind  of  Christ's  divinity,  and  of  Gos- 
pel-truth. And  with  what  success,  though  aided  by 
the  fagot  and  the  sword,  the  genuine  disciple  of 
Christianity,  of  this,  or  any  other,  time,  would  blush 
to  tell.  And  if  we  may  measure  the  extent  of  unbe- 
lief, by  the  deep  and  reiterated  lamentations  of  the 
pious;  Christendom  has  dearly  paid,  perhaps  too  dear- 
ly, for  its  reformation,  however  tenaciously  its  friends 
may  hold  the  contrary. 

The  proposition  is  plausible  at  least,  that  no  less 
miracle  is  required  to  produce  conviction  of  a  super- 
human truth,  in  the  mind  of  an  individual,  than  in 
the  minds  of  the  whole  human  race — nor  can  it  mat- 
ter at  all,  whether  the  subject  of  such  communication 
is  philosopher  or  fool;  since  a  supernatural  idea,  being 
acquired  ceither  by  sensation  nor  reflection,  can  stand 


134 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


in  no  relation,  whatever,  to  a  natural  one,  nor  be 
modified  in  the  least,  by  any  of  the  phenomena  of 
Man  or  Nature. 

What  worse  improvidence,  therefore,  of  either  God 
or  man,  than  to  begin  to  propagate  a  truth,  especially 
of  the  Gospel's  reputed  moment,  too  late  to  benefit  a 
hundred  generations;  and  by  a  method,  so  defective, 
that  eighteen  hundred  years  have  been  wasted  on  its 
preface — a  method  inevitably,  and  proverbially,  abor- 
tive, without  the  aid  of  God's  incessant,  miraculous 
interposition,  through  the  medium  of  His  Grace! 
And  if  the  Gospel-dispensation  were  made  for  man's 
immediate  safety,  wherefore  was  God  so  culpably  im- 
provident, as  to  defer  that  dispensation  for  the  period 
of  four  thousand  years,  wherein  some  hundred  thou- 
sand million  souls  must  have  been  lost,  for  want  of 
gospel  intervention?  Or  wherefore  all  this  bustle, 
about  a  novel  method  of  salvation,  while  the  Hea- 
then's piety  and  the  Jew's  obedience  were  adequate 
to  its  accomplishment?  And  is  a  god  of  such  a  char- 
acter worthy  of  respect,  and  his  absurdities  to  be  ac- 
credited as  supernatural  and  divine  phenomena?  Or 
is  it  not  inversely  true,  that  such  a  god  does  not  exist, 
except  in  Superstition's  wild  imagination,  and  thus, 
too  palpably  preposterous  for  serious  contemplation? 
And  however  generally  or  universally  the  idea  may 
have  been  adopted,  or  venerated,  is  it  at  all  too  sacred 
for  children  to  break  their  jests  upon? 

And  yet,  is  not  this  fallacious  whim  personified,  the 
very  God  both  Jews  and  Christians  worship,  and  to 
which  the  work  of  miracles  is  imputed? — And  to 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  125 

which  the  wisest  and  best  of  men  must  bow,  m  hum- 
blest adoration,  or  be  stigmatized  as  willfully  corrupt 
and  dangerous  atheists,  to  shake  whose  hands  is 
thought,  by  not  a  few,  a  cleanseless  contamination? 

Superstition  seems  to  have  sworn  her  votaries  upon 
the  altar  of  incorrigible  ignorance,  never  to  yield  as- 
sent to  the  suggestions  of  Reason,  upon  the  dogmas 
of  theology;  nor  to  discard  a  folly  she  has  ever 
taught. — Nor  has  that  oath  been  often  broken,  nor 
she  annoyed  by  frequent  heresy. 

But  upon  the  question  of  the  supernatural  charac- 
ter of  revelation,  were  all  the  other,  innumerable  ob- 
jections nugatory,  the  two  following  appear  to  be  suf- 
ficient to  invalidate  the  superstitious  dogma.  These 
are  the  fallibility  of  the  compilers,  and  the  metaphys- 
ical ignorance  of  their  authors. 

To  substantiate  the  first  objection,  it  should  be  only 
necessary  to  refer  to  the  word  apocryphal,  as  applied 
to  the  character  of  religious  essays,  of  both  the  Old 
and  New  Testament  eras. 

Were  it  true,  that  individuals  have  beensupernatu- 
rally  inspired  with  ideas,  that  Nature  could  never 
have  suggested,  and  therefore  nugatory  to  common 
sense;  and  entirely  incommunicable  to  others,  but  by 
the  same  supernatural  process;  there  is,  nevertheless, 
a  serious  difficulty  presented,  in  the  absence  of  an  in- 
fallible criterion  by  which  the  uninspired  may  clearly 
determine  its  character:  For  unless  there  is  some- 
thing of  this  kind  associated  with  such  unnatural  com- 
munication, there  must  be  a  perpetual  liability  to  mis- 
take, imposture  and  scepticism.  Hence  it  should  not 


1-6  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

be  denied,  that  a  sufficient  test  should  be  connected 
with  divine  revelation,  or  with  the  revelator  himself, 
to  resolve  entirely,  the  doubts  of  the  rankest  incre- 
dulity. And  upon  this  momentous  subject,  it  seems 
omniscience  would  thus  have  certainly  suggested,  and 
omnipotence  have  promptly  instituted. 

Now.  you  will  not  misunderstand  me,  when  I  em- 
phatically declare,  in  this  public  position,  that,  what- 
ever the  consequence,  I  fearlessly  assume  the  respon- 
sibility of  denying  the  existence  of  any  such  provi- 
sion, and  cast  my  defiance  of  con tro version,  boldly  in 
the  teeth  of  a  reputedly  infallible  Tritheism. 

You  are  all,  doubtless,  aware,  that  both  the  old, 
and  new  Testaments  were  compiled  from  a  great 
number  of  miscellaneous  manuscripts,  differing  very 
widely,  from  each  other,  in  style,  and  in  moral  and 
religious  character.  And  that  from  such  betrogen- 
eous  mass,  those  selections  were  made,  which  ap- 
peared to  be  most  consonant,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
compilers,  with  the  genuine  spirit  of  divine  truth — 
that  i?,  truth  upon  moral  and  religious  subjects.  Of 
these  manuscripts,  it  cannot  be  doubted,  that  very 
many  were  entirely  rejected,  on  account  of  the  ab- 
sence of  the  required  characteristic. ^-Others  were 
believed  to  possess  it,  but  in  too  slight  a  degree  to  ex- 
tinguish every  possible  doubt  of  their  genuineness. 
Those  it  would  seem,  were  too  highly  appreciated, 
to  be  altogether  discarded;  and  were,  therefore,  pres- 
erved, and  finally  arranged  under  the  denomination, 
Apocrypha.  A  third  class  appears  to  have  consisted 
of  those  writings,  which  carried  about  them  the  indu- 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS.  1*27 

bitable  evidence  of  supernatural  origin,  and  Mere 
compiled  under  the  denominations  of  The  Old — and 
New — Testaments. 

These,  however,  have  undergone,  at  different  lime* 
and  by  different  tribunals,  several  revisions  and  mod- 
ifications-/So  that  what  has  been  unsuspiciously 
adopted,  as  genuine  revelation,  at  one  period,  has 
been  rejected  as  fallacious,  or  apocryphal,  at  another.) 
Hence  it  is  a  most  natural,  however  injudicious,  con- 
clusion, that  what  are  distinguished  as  the  holy  scrip- 
tures have,  at  all  times,  participated  of  the  fallacies, 
a«d  even  absurdities,  of  the  illiterate  eras  in  which 
they  originated,  and  in  which  they  have  been  succes- 
sively, though  not  successfully,  weeded:  For  not- 
withstanding they  have  undergone  much  advantage- 
ous pruning,  they  have  still  retained  many  superflu- 
ous and  uncomely  appendages. 

Now,  do  you  not  think  it  most  preposterous,  that 
a  supernatural  discrimination  could  have  suffered  the 
embarrassment  of  a  doubt?  Or  that  there  could  have 
remained,  under  such  a  criticism,  an  apocryphal,  or 
doubtful,  essay?  And  yet  there  are  many  such,  of 
both  the  Jewish  and  Christian  scriptures,  which  have 
at  different  periods  of  religious  history,  been  confi- 
dently adopted,  and  devotionally  used,  as  portions  of 
divine  revelation.  Hence  the  conclusion  appears  to 
be  unavoidable,  that  the  scriptures  were  compiled, 
under  the  fallible  direction  of  mere  human  judg- 
ment; and  consequently  of  no  higher  authority  than 
any  other  human  speculations.  Nor  does  this  con- 
sideration, in  the  least,  depreciate  their  value:  For 


1-2-3  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

truth  can  never  be  intrinsically  modified  by  the  pecu- 
liarity of  its  origin,  or  mode  of  communication. — And 
were  it  suggested  by  an  idiot  or  a  devil,  and  in  harsh 
or  exquisite  poetry  or  prose,  it  would  be  no  less  val- 
uable in  its  effects,  when  adopted,  than  though  it  were 
really  communicated  by  the  incomprehensible,  if  not 
impracticable  method  of  divine  revelation.  And  this 
is  confidently  offered  as  intrinsic  evidence  of  the  fal- 
lacy of  the  aforesaid  dogma. 

Of  the  second  objection,  or  the  metaphysical  igno- 
rance of  the  biblical  writers,  very  much  more  ought 
to  be  said,  in  its  elucidation,  than  is  compatible  witli 
our  present  opportunity,  or  the  feeble  ability  of  your 
humble  servant.  That  mankind  were  anciently  and 
scripturally  deemed  to  be  morally  and  religiously 
responsible  for  the  character  of  their  belief,  admits  of 
no  manner  of  doubt,  whilst  the  validity  of  any  part  ef 
the  scriptures  continues  to  be  acknowledged. 

This  proposition  is  not  only  positively  and  unequiv- 
ocally asserted  by  Christ  himself,  or  by  the  author  of 
the  Gospel,  and  often  repeated  by  his  apostles,  but  i> 
so  common  a  sentiment  in  both  the  old  and  new 
Testaments,  especially  the  latter,  that  I  should  deem 
itself  justly  chargable  with  a  willful  insult  to  your 
religious  education,  were  I  to  designate  particular  in- 
stances. Hence,  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  man  is 
positively  responsible  to  his  maker,  for,  at  least,  his 
religious  opinions  and  affections,  or  that  the  Omnis- 
cient Son  of  God  was  grossly  ignorant  of  the  meta- 
physical character  of  his  creatures.  Nor  do  I  feel  the 
least  embarrassment  from  the  predicament  in  which 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  129 

this  proposition  places  me;  since  I  deem  it  wholly 
unnecessary  to  review  the  history  of  metaphysical 
fallacies,  or  to  disturb  the  literary  lumber  of  by-gone 
ages,  under  which  a  superstitious  Theology  has  been 
indefatigably  laboring  to  bury  the  question  of  man's 
religious  irresponsibility.  I  am  confident  that  no 
scientific  question  is  less  difficult  of  apprehension 
than  the  one  under  consideration;  since  it  requires 
nothing  more  of  any  individual  whatever,  in  order 
that  he  should  be  able  to  judge,  with  sufficient  accu- 
racy, of  every  psychological  phenomenon,  concerned 
in  its  solution,  than  to  watch  carefully  and  impartial- 
ly, the  operation  of  his  own  mind,  in  any  given  in- 
stance of  voluntary  action.  Nor  does  it  matter,  in 
this  inquiry,  whether  a  thinking  soul,  or  a  thinking 
brain,  is  admitted  in  the  premises.  In  either  case,  the 
psychological  history  is  the  same;  the  mental  phe- 
nomena being  developed  by  the  same  causes,  and  in 
the  same  order  of  succession,  whether  thought  is  a 
function  of  the  brain;  or  of  the  soul,  displaying  itself 
through  that  medium.  Hence  we  again  assume,  that 
thought  is  not  self  generative,  but  entirely  dependent 
upon  impulse,  for  its  developement;  and,  as  an  ex- 
emplification, would  offer  the  following. — 

You.  are  doubtless  aware  that  many  petrified  speci- 
mens, or  organic  remains,  of  extinct  species  of  vegeta- 
bles and  animals,  have  been  exhumed  from  deep  and 
solid  masses  of  transition  and  younger  rocks,  in  va- 
rious geographical  situations  upon  our  globe;  and  that 
their  examination  has  not  only  produced  a  series  of 
novel  reflections  among  philosophers,  but  has  literal- 

16 


130  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS, 

ly  established  a  new  era  in  the  science  of  geology:  and 
beside  these,  has  thrown  an  enormous  weight  in  the 
scale  of  probabilities  against  the  Mosaic  Cosmogony: 
and  hence  against  the  supernatural  character  of  the 
Pentateuch.  And  were  you  asked,  whether  you  be- 
lieve that  any  of  these  particular  reflections  and  opin- 
ions would  have  occurred,  if  accident  had  not  exposed 
the  aforesaid  petrifactions  to  human  observation;  would 
you  hesitate  to  yield  an  answer  upon  the  side  of  its 
negative? 

You  are  also  aware,  that,  once,  the  whole  human 
race,  who  were  capable  of  reflection,  believed  the 
earth's  surface  to  be  flat,  with  the  slight  exception  of 
hill  and  dale;  nor  sho-uld  it  be  suspected,  that  you  are 
unacquainted  with  the  circumstances  that  prove  it  to 
be  spherical. — And  were  not  these  circumstances  ap- 
plied, and  reapplied  successively,  for  thousands  of 
years,  before  they  produced  a  final  conviction  of  the 
truth?  And  is  it,  nevertheless,  preposterously  pre- 
tended, that  such  conviction  could  have  been  other- 
wise attained — uninduced  and  self-generated? — Yes. 
to  the  deep  disgrace  of  present  metaphysical  science, 
it  is  so!  Nor  is  this  the  only,  nor  the  silliest  dogma, 
that  Prejudice  has  instituted,  for  common-sense  to 
sneer  at. 

Thought  has  been  referred  to  the  brain,  whose  ac- 
tion, or  functional  excitation  is  assumed  to  be  identi- 
cal with  thought,  as  that  of  muscle  is  with  motion; 
nor  is  the  one  more  capable  than  the  other  of  origina- 
ting its  own  actions. — 

For.  if  the  brain,  were  really  possessed  of  such  ca- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  131 

I 

fwcity,  it  would  have  been  nugatory,  for  any  intellect- 
<ual  purpose  whatever,  that  the  organic  pelrefactions 
referred  to,  should  have  been  disinterred  from  their 
rocky  inclosures  that  they  might  be  recognized;  nor 
the  evidences  of  the  earth's  spheticity  required,  to 
produce  conviction  of  the  fact — nor  yet  the  cogita- 
tions of  gods  or  men,  to  have  been  expressed,  in  order 
10  their  being  fully  understood.  And,  certainly,  if 
there  were  any  other  mode  of  originating  ideas  than 
by  impulse,  human  apprehension  might  be  indeed 
limitless. 

Take,  if  you  p4ease,  any  individual  circumstance 
of  your  life,  in  which  opinion,  preference  and  will,  or 
determination,  have  been  involved;  and  see  whether 
its  analysis  will  justify,  or  not,  the  prevailing  dogma 
of  religious,  or  even  of  moral,  responsibility  ! 

Admitting  what  it  would  he  the  depth  of  absurdity 
to  deny,  that  voluntary  actions  are  never  performed 
without  motive;  will  you  tell  me  whether,  of  any 
number  of  contemplated  motives,  that  of  the  greatest 
apparent  value,  has  not  always  predominated?  Are 
you. conscious  of  having,  at  any  time,  manufactured 
the  motives  of  your  own  actions?  Or  have  you  only 
judged,  more  or  less  accurate!}',  of  the  comparative 
value  of  such  motives,  as  accident  has  thrown  in  your 
way?  When  were  your  partialities  or  prejudices,  in 
the  least,  modified  by  your  own  predetermination? 
Or,  finally,  in  what  particular  instance  of  your  life, 
do  you  feel  assured,  that  you  could  have  thought  or 
acted  differently,  without  a  variation  of  the  attendant 
circumstances? — And  whether  those  circumstances 


132  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

were,  or  \vere  not,  subject  to  the  influence  of  your 
own  volition  r  And  until  these  questions  shall  have 
been  answered  in  behalf  of  responsibility,  man  must 
acknowledge  himself  to  be  one  of  the  innumerable 
products  of  Nature's  plastic  energies,  which  she  has 
forced  into  existence,  and  also  into  the  possession  of 
the  characteristics  of  his  anomalous  being — that  he  is 
a  creature  of  circumstance,  who  thinks  and  acts  con- 
sonantly with  the  affinities,  constitutionally  established 
between  his  own  sensibilities  and  the  contingents  upon 
which  they  may,  at  any  time,  infringe.  For  other- 
wise he  may,  and  must,  assume  the  prerogative  of 
predetermining  his  own  thoughts,  or  of  contemplating 
what  he  will  contemplate;  and  of  foreordaining  his 
own  actions,  independently  of  impulse,  or  antecedent 
causation — that  is,  in  spite  of  God  or  Nature:  And 
being  thus,  unembarrassed  by  the  arbitrary  formality 
of  motives,  he  would  be  enabled  to  institute  his  own 
contemplative  elysium,  in  spite  of  the  lacerations, 
physical  circumstance  should  maliciously  inflict  upon 
his  animal  corporation.  Nor,  whilst  unhappiness 
should  be  thus  left  to  his  own  latches,  would  he  be 
Jess  insane,  than  though  he  were  to  attempt  to  bite  his 
own  nose  off,  should  he  fail  in  the  manufacture,  or 
preconcertion  of  such  cogitations  as  would  extinguish 
the  possibility  of  suffering  an  unhappy  moment. 

It  is  doubtless  true,  that  opinion  governs  the  man, 
and  not  man  opinion.  Opinion  is  enforced  upon  the 
man,  and  the  man  impelled  thereby.  And  wherever 
opinion  has  been  proved  to  be  judicious,  by  the  prac- 
tical benefits  it  has  produced,  it  and  they  have  been 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  1 

honored  by  the  name  of  virtue;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
whenever  it  has  been  erroneous,  and  its  consequences 
disastrous,  it  and  they  have  been  stigmatized  as  vice. 
Hence  it  may  be  plausibly  concluded,  that  virtue  and 
vice,  or  good  and  evil,  have  not  an  intrinsic,  but  mere- 
ly a  conventional,  existence — that  being  good,  which 
is  productive  of  happiness,  and  that  evil,  which  im- 
pairs it. 

But  to  attempt  the  clearest  possible  elucidation  of 
the  question  of  responsibility^for  mere  opinion,  or  be- 
lief, as  well  as  that  of  directing  or  modifying  its  in- 
stitution; I  would  be  allowed  to  present  you  with  the 
following  additional  illustration. 

Suppose  yourselves,  individually,  to  have  been 
nurtured,  in  the  strictest  tenets  of  Romanism,  with 
the  clearest  conviction  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope, 
and  of  the  truth  of  transubstantiation,  or  the  miraculous 
transmutation  of  the  flour  and  wine,  constituting  its 
sacramental  wafers,  into  the  real  flesh  and  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ; /and  that  you  doubted  not,  while  parta- 
king of  the  sacrament,  that  you  were  literally  canni- 
balizing upon  the  cast  off  corporality  of  the  Son  of 
God!  J  Thus  far  it  is  clearly  absurd  that  you  should 
be  charged  with  responsibility  for  an  opinion  thrust 
upon  you  by  your  spiritual  teachers,  and  therefore 
must  have  innocently  acquired;  and  one,  you  also 
deemed  so  invaluable,  that  the  basest  means  were 
more  than  justified  in  its  support;  for  thus  thought 
the  church. 

Suppose  you  shall  have,  subsequently,  fallen  upon 
some  lucid  commentary  of  one  of  the  great  reformers 


154          >  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

of  Popery,  that  shall  have  cleared  off  the  opacity  of 
your  vision,  with  the  despatch  of  a  successful  occu- 
list,  whereby  you  shall  have  come  to  detest  the  opin- 
ion you  lately  thought  so  valuable!  And  where  is 
DOW  the  responsibility  for  this  new  opinion,  which 
the  church  calls  heresy,  and  deserving  of  torture  and 
perdition :  Did  you  predetermine  it,  or  design,  or  in- 
stitute, the  means  of  its  accomplishment?  O'r  were 
not  those. means  produced  by  talents  much  surpassing 
yours,  and  dropped,  by  accident,  upon  the  supersti- 
tious path,  you  were  stupidly  and  contentedly  pursu- 
ing: and  which  you  ignorantly,  but  piously  believed 
the  only  way  to  heaven? 

Having  acquired  your  opinion,  you  thought  it  pass- 
ing strange,  that  you  should  have  been  so  obstinately 
wrong,  or  so  well  pleased  with  so  palpable  an  error. 
And  yet  your  conscience  told  you,  there  was  no  need 
of  penitence.  And  had  you  been  a  practical  inquisi- 
tor, and  tortured  out  the  lives  of  countless,  conscien- 
tious men,  for  what  you  deemed  the  welfare  of  the 
church,  your  worst  reflection  should  have  been  re- 
gret, that  your  opinions  were  not  sooner  changed. — 
And  thus  thought  Paul,  of  his  Christian  persecutions. 

In  this  example,  you  have  also  an  illustration  of  the 
fallacy  of  an  almost  universal  opinion,  that  we  are 
happier  with  our  present  belief,  than  we  should  be 
with  any  possible  substitute.  For  it  has  been  shown, 
that  you  were  not  only  entirely  satisfied  with,  but 
obstinately  tenacious  of  your  opinions,  as  papists: 
and  that,  as  protestants,  also,  you  were  not  only 
equally  sat istied  with  your  new  ones;  but  were  sur- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  13'J 

| 

prised  at  the  grossness  of  your  former  errors,  and 
blushed  at  the  recollection  of  having  stupidly  adopted 
them.  Opinion,  therefore,  is  not  the  more  satisfac- 
tory, for  being  one  thing  or  another,  but  for  being 
ours:  Hence  it  should  be  a  matter  of  indifference, 
whether  \ve  retain  our  present  opinion  or  not — wheth- 
er we  hold  the  same  perpetually,  or  change  it  hourly, 
so  far  at  least  as  mere  opinion  contributes  to  happi- 
nes.  But  you  have  already  heard  that  there  is  anoth- 
er, and  more  substantial,  value  in  opinion,  estimated 
by  its  salutary  influence  upon  human  conduct.  Our 
object,  therefore  should  not  be  to  retain  a  present 
opinion,  but  to  acquire  a  right  one,  in  which  our  real 
interest  always  predominates. 

And  do  you  really  think  it  a  successful  display  of 
what  you  deem  to  be  infinite  wisdom,  wherein  the  in- 
carnate Logos,  or  wisdom  of  God,  is  made  to  say,  that 
He  will  reprove  the  world  of  sin,  because  they  be- 
lieve not  on  him — and  that  they  who  believe  not  that 
he  is  the  Christ  shall  die  in  their  sins,  and  of  course 
be  excluded  from  paradise? — That  he  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved;  but  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned;  and  that  he  that  believeth  on 
the  Son,  hath  everlasting  life;  and  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  not  see  life,  &c.;  especially,  when  contrasted 
with  the  following,  Mark  9.23:  "Jesus  said  unto 
him,  If  thou  canst  believe,  all  things  are  possible  to 
him  that  believeth"  ?  Most  certainly  the  man  could 
believe  in  the  power  of  Christ  to  restore  the  health 
of  his  epiliptic  son,  as  readily  as  he  could  believe  His 
superhuman  character.  (The  first  he  might  believe  if 
he  could — the  latter  he  should  believe  or  be  damned  A 


136  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

Did  Christ  upbraid  his  appostles,  as  in  Mark  16.14; 
because  they  believed  not  the  witnesses  to  his  resur- 
rection, and.  nevertheless,  condescend  to  afford  Thom- 
£  ratuitous  demonstration  of  the  fact,  without 
demanding  his  belief  upon  a  less  consideration;  as 
though  unbelief  were  not  altogether  reprehensible 
wherein  testimony,  however  direct  and  unimpeacha- 
ble, fails  to  produce  conviction? 

And  what  do  you  think  of  the  natural,  or  supernat- 
ural, acquirements  of  the  renowned  disciple  of  the 
ficticious,  Jewish  Gamaliel,  or  recompense  of  God, 
when  he  charges  his  brethren  "to  take  heed,  lest  there 
be,  in  any  of  them,  an  evil  heart  of  unbelief,"  to 
which  abundant  reference  is  made,  as  the  seat  of 
propensities,  affections,  preference,  will  and  even 
opinion  itself,  leaving1  the  brain,  which  is  the  exclusive 
psychological  organ,  without  a  single  function  to  per- 
foTrn? 

The  bible,  therefore,  promulgates  opinions,  whose 
absurdity  should  have  secured  their  explosion,  even 
among  the  children  of  the  peasantry,  centuries  ago: 
And  yet  their  appreciation  with  theology  renders 
them,  apparently,  too  invaluable  to  be  voluntarily  re- 
linquished, or  even  wrenched  from  the  gripe  of  a 
superstitious  obstinacy,  which  tradition  has  so  long 
petted,  that  it  has  become  altogether  incorrigible. 

It  should  be  deemed  no  less  than  blasphemous,  in 
these  latter  days  of  improved  erudition,  to  reiterate 
the  preposterous  fallacies  of  reputed  divine  revela- 
tion, as  though  God  were  once  so  ignorant  or  abusive, 
as  to  have  adopted  or  promulgated  them,  to  his  own, 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  137 

and  his  creature's  shame.  Insanity  and  idocy,  only, 
should  be  excused  for  charging  God  with  having 
wrought  a  fallacy,  or  committed  a  mistake.  No  !  that 
which  is  untrue  in  Nature,  a  God  can  never  have 
adopted,  nor  inculcated.  The  foregoing,  therefore, 
are  human  fallacies;  anatomical^  physiological  and 
metaphysical  errors,  of  which  the  Clergy,  from  ignc- 
rance  or  prejudice,  or  both,  continue  to  be  madly  te- 
nacious, in  spite  of  reiterated  confutation:  And  io  the 
very  language,  that  science  has  long  since  rendered 
nugatory,  they  pretend  to  philosophize  and  instruct 
an  illiterate  laity,  whose  stupidity  fattens  upon  their 
theological  and  metaphysical  stultiloquence. 

And  here,  you  will  permit  me  to  give  a  brief  reca- 
pitulation of  my  sentiments  relative  to  that  most  stupid 
of  all  serious  questions,  viz.,  that  of  moral  culpabili- 
ty for  mere  abstract  opinion;,  which  is,  metaphysically 
interpreted,  a  state  of  mind  either  favorable,  or  unfa* 
vorable,  to  whatever  suggestion  or  proposition  it  shall 
have  been  presented  with — the  former  constituting 
belief,  the  latter  unbelief.  If,  therefore,  a  person  can- 
not institute  an  opinion  antecedently  to  suggestive 
circumstances,-  and  even  contrary  to  their  natural  ten- 
dencies, it  is  clear,  that  belief  and  unbelief,  in  all  pos- 
sible cases,  are  irresistibly  forced  upon  him;  and 
hence  the  charge  of  moral  or  religious  responsibility 
must  be  entirely  nugatory. 

The  mind,  as  has  been  already  said,  is  dormant  du- 
ring the  absence  of  excitation;  nor  can  opinion  be 
ever  formed  without  a  presentation  to  the  mind,  of 
more  or  less  of  those  circumstances,  which  have  ac- 

17 


13* 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


quired  the  name  of  evidence.  As  well  might  math- 
ematics be  instituted  without  numbers,  or  geometry 
without  figure.  Hence,  if  opinion,  or  belief  and  dis- 
belief cannot  occur,  in  the  absence  of  what  the  mind 
recognizes  as  testimony,  which  would  be  equivalent 
to  aa  opinion  without  an  object,  it  must  depend,  in- 
eontrovertibly,  and  exclusively,  upon  circumstances, 
over  which  the  mind  possesses  no  modifying  control. 
Responsibility,  therefore,  for  the  formation,  or  pos- 
session, of  opinion,  is  one  of  the  senseless  dogmas  of 
illiterate  superstition;  of  which  it  is  disgraceful  to 
acknowledge,  that  it  is,  yet,  to  be  exploded:  For.  if  it 
is  culpable,  in  any  case,  to  have  acquired  an  errone- 
ous belief,  a  single  exception  to  the  rule  is  altogether 
inadmissible;  and  hence  culpability  must  be  as  cer- 
tainly, if  not  as  momentously,  involved  in  an  errone- 
oirs  opinion  of  astronomy,  or  chemistry,  as  of  theolo- 
^Pp'frf  morality.  And  who.  allow  me  to  ask,  is  so  un- 
reasonable, as  to  reproach  a  cobbler,  with  his  ignorance 
of  Sir  Isaac  Newton's  Principia;  or  a  back-woods 
log-roller,  with  that  of  Sir  Humphrey  Davy's,  or  Jus- 
tus Liebig's  Agricultural  Chemistry;  of  which,  in  all 
probability,  neither  has  ever  heard  ?  Yet.  if  the 
scriptures  are  literally  true,  an  erroneous  opinion  of 
the  personality,  or  divinity  of  Jesus  Christ,  which, 
by  the  by,  stands  upon  the  same  foundation  as  any 
other,  is  to  be  visited  with  the  amazingly  dispropor- 
tioned  penalty  of  eternal  damnation.  And,  most  cer- 
tainly, if  belief  can  be  instituted  without  apparent 
evidence,  it  can  be  so,  in,  direct  opposition  to  it.  And. 
hence,  a  Lazarus  might  have  sanely  believed,  that  he 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  1S(J 

was  snugly  deposited  in  Abraham's  bosom.  Nor, 
upon  tiiis  principle,  would  the  literal  incarnation  oi' 
the  spirit  of  evil  find  the  least  inconvenience  in  be- 
lieving1 himself,  to  be  the  immaculate  Son  of  God. 
And  so  Napoleon  might,  if  he  would,  have  believed 
his  ruinous  defeat  at  Waterloo  a  splendid  victory; 
and  that  his  murderously  unexampled  retreat  from 
Moscow,  and  his  exiles  to  Klb,  and  St.  Helena,  as  so 
many  magnificent  triumphs. 

Now,  religious  infidelity  consists,  in  fact,  of  a  dis- 
belief of  these  and  similar  contemptible  absurdities, 
which  Theology  has  arbitrarily  and  successfully  im- 
posed upon  mankind:  Nor  dees  it  involve  the  slight- 
est distrust  of  a  single  truth  in  Nature.  It  frankly 
admits  all  the  testimony  afforded  by  Nature,  and  all 
the  inductions  Reason  has  been  able  to  draw  there- 
from, in  favor  of  the  existence  of  a  God,  which  it  is, 
however,  entirely  unable  to  distinguish  from  the  idea 
of  ultimate  causality,  whereat  every  continuous  in- 
quiry must  finally  terminate;  and  at  which  every  se- 
ries of  phenomena  must  have  commenced. 

Religious  faith,  on  the  contrary,  appears  to  have 
nothing  to  do  with  Nature,  or  with  any  of  her  palpa- 
ble realities;  but  professes  to  spurn  them,  as  objects 
entirely  unworthy  of  its  exalted  contemplation  !  It 
constitutes  one  of  the  three  rundles  of  the  ladder, 
upon  which  a  fictitious  Spiritualism  anticipates  its 
ascent  to  a  fictitious  Paradise.  And  yet,  so  inconsist- 
ent are  spiritualists,  that  while  they  decry  the  world 
and  the  flesh,  as  being  too  uncleanly  far  the  residence 
and  habitation  of  tbeir  sanctified  souls,  they  are  often 


140  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISM1*. 

found  so  firmly  clinched  to  its  veriest  corruptions, 
that  Death  itself  can  scarcely  unloose  their  gripe! 
•-^Yes,  while  they  are  importuning  you  to  relinquish 
your  attachment  to  "the  things  of  time  and  sense" 
for  a  more  exalted  devotion  to  God  and  spiritualism, 
they  are  doubtless  sometimes,  much  more  seriously 
devising  some  artful  plan,  to  circumvent  a  neighbor 
in  a  bargain,  and  thereby  transfer,  unpaid  for,  anoth- 
er's property  to  themselves:  Nor  is  it  dealing  unfairly 
with  spiritualists,  an  occasional,  magnanimous  ex- 
ception having  been  admitted,  to  say  that,  while  they 
point  with  one  hand  toward  an  imaginary  heaven, 
they  are  literally  committing  felony  with  the  othenj 
Such  is  the  apparent  practical  result  of  both  Theism 
and  Tri-theism,  notwithstanding  they  assume  to  have 
been  instituted  and  patronized  of  God;  sustained  by 
miracles;  and  verified  by  martyrdom;  and  all,  espe- 
cially, for  man's  regeneracy,  from  a  state  of  nature, 
to  a  state  of  grace! 

And,  in  the  face  of  ail  this  palpable  invalidation, 
the  religious  Fanatic,  nevertheless,  believes  all  truth, 
superior  to  that  which  ministers  to  the  welfare  of  the 
beast,  to  be  safely  wrapped  up  within  the  folds  of  a 
stultifying  and  maddening  spiritualism!  AVherefore 
then,  I  boldly  ask,  should  the  slightest  blush  suffuse 
the  cheek  of  him,  who  is  peevishly  taunted  with  his 
infidelit*1?  Should  he  not  rather  glory  in  his,  little 
less  than  miraculous,  emancipation  from  the  intellect- 
ual thraldom  to  which  his  race  has  so  long,  tamely 
and  shamefully  submitted?  And  let  me  indulge  the 
hope,  that  your  affirmative  assent  is  unembarrassed  bv 
a  momentary  doubt! 


LECTURE  V. 

THE    CRITICAL    EXAMINATION    OF    THE  OBJECTS  OF 
RELIGIOUS    FAITH    CONTINUED. 

Scepticism  has  been  constantly,  and,  doubtless, 
with  no  little  propriety,  taunted  with  its  ignorance  of 
both,  the  letter  and  spirit  of  those  scriptures  it  would, 
as  is  said,  ruinously,  if  not  maliciously,  invalidate. 
But  admitting  the  justice  of  the  general  charge,  that 
sceptics  are  poorly  read,  in,  both,  the  scriptures  and 
their  voluminous,  elaborate  commentaries;  the  rule 
has,  nevertheless,  been  interrupted  by  frequent  indi- 
vidual exceptions,  wherein  may  have  been  found 
enough  of  biblical  erudition  to  have  done  credit  to 
the  cowl  or  suplice — to  pope  or  bishop.  QAnd  yet 
the  general  reading  of  those  scriptures,  superficial  as 
it  may  have  been,  has,  doubtless,  engendered  and 
nourished  the  present  luxuriant  Infidelity^  that  threat- 
ens, ere  long,  to  supersede  the  superstitions  of  Chris- 
tianity; and  that,  without  detracting  from  its  ethical, 
and  only,  truth:  Therefore,  whilst  the  Christian 
solicits  attention  to  the  Scriptures,  as  an  infallible  mean 
of  instituting  and  confirming  spiritual  faith,  the  seep- 


142  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

tic  may,  with,  at  least,  an  equal  confidence,  advance 
the  same  proposition,  to  invalidate  their  superhuman 
Character:  And  whilst  the  one  is  laboriously  search- 
ing out  biblical  concordances;  the  other, with  much  less 
labor,  may  sate  himself  with  the  contrary.  Apply 
yourselves,  therefore,  both  to  the  volume  of  Nature, 
and  that  of  reputed,  divine  revelation,  perusing  and 
comparing  them,  carefully,  page  by  page,  that  you 
may,  judiciously,  decide,  how  far  the  truths  of  the 
former  corroborate  the  hypotheses  of  the  latter!  Nor 
distrust  the  validity  of  this  assertion. — That  Nature 
is  one  great,  infallible  truth — a  magnificent  aggrega- 
tion of  all  the  miscellaneous  particulars  of  herself  and 
history;  constituting  the  sole  criterion,  by  which  all 
human  truth,  of  both  thought  and  action,  should  be 
tested!  For  veritable  thoughts  and  opinions  are  but 
Nature  spiritualized — literal  truths  accurately  cop- 
ied by  the  brain!  However  ample,  the  apparent  cir- 
cumference of  our  rule,  religious  faith  is,  neverthe- 
less, excluded  from  its  limits.  One  of  its  earliest  and 
warmest  advocates  has,  most  aptly,  defined  it  in  Heb. 
11,  Iff'  Now  faith  is  the  substance  of  things  hoped  v 
iuTj  the  evidence  of  things  not  seen."  And,  in  this, 
we  have  a  striking  instance  of  old  fashioned,  logical 
acumen,  which,  by  the  by,  is  shamefully  in  fashion 
yet;  especially,  in  the  service  of  theism!  j 

Two  propositions  are,  pretty  clearly,  included  in 
the  apostle's  definition  of  faith;  first,  that  it  is  the 
substance,  and  second,  that  it  is  the  evidence,  of  a 
thing — or,  that  it  is,  both,  the  substance  and  evidence, 
that  our  confident  expectations  will  be  verified;  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISM*.  14 

slightest  analysis  of  which,  must  clearly  expose  the 
inanity,  if  not  the  insanity,  of  its  author. 

By  what  sophistical  necromancy,  a  literal  substance 
can  he  wrought,  out  of  mere  mental  confidence,  or 
how  mind  can  be  transformed  to  matter,  can  be  known, 
only,  to  supernaturalism  !  Nor  can  it  be  reconciled, 
with  any  of  the  views  of  common  sense,  that  faith  is 
the  evidence  of  any  truth  whatever,  except  that  the 
mind  has  been,  antecedently,  influenced  by  real  or 
imaginary  testimony  in  favor  of  the  event  hoped  for! 
And  yet  this  sonorous  inanity — this  rhetorical  mi- 
gacity,  has  been  pompously  enunciated  from  every 
pulpit  in  Christendom,  and  upon  every  convenient 
occasion,  as  being  especially  imbued  with  the  awful 
spirit  of  divine  wisdom! 

Faith,  of  whatever  kind,  or  degree,  is  nothing, 
more  nor  less,  but  a  confident  expectation  of  the  lite- 
ral occurrence  of  some  anticipated  event;  and  is, 
therefore,  neither  the  substance,  nor  the  evidence  of 
such  event;  being  itself  as  fallacious  as  any  other  at- 
tribute of  humanity.  But  if  religious  faith  possesses 
the  efficiency  imputed  to  it  by  the  Scriptures,  and  yet 
can  claim  no  strength,  superior  to  that  of  any  other; 
for  that  faith  is  still  but  faith,  whatever  subject  shall 
have  developed  it,  nor  always  stronger  in  the  right 
than  wrong;  then,  Monomania  should  never  err;  Li- 
centiousness be  disappointed;  nor  Parsimony  be  un- 
happy: Nor  should  Millerians,  or  Second-adventists, 
remain,  in  lingering  disappointment,  for  having  failed 
of  their  anticipated  translation  to  the  skies! 

But  to  return  to  the   Pentateuch,   where   Criticism 


144  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

will  find  no  wane  of  objects,  on  which  to   vent   its  ae. 
rimony. 

At  the  termination  of  the  deluge,  we  find  the  hu- 
man nice  reduced  to  eight  individuals  of  a  single 
family,  from  three  of  whom  the  world  was  to  be  pa- 
ternally indebted  for  its  repopulation :  And  yet,  bu-t 
about  a  century  had  elagsed,  when  Babylon  the  great 
— the  queen  of  cities — a  peopled  world  in  miniature, 
stood,  gigantically,  astride  the  majestic  river  of  Eden; 
and,  in  her  vain  assumption  of  omnipotence,  mocked 
at  invasion,  and  laughed  at  the  reiterated,  prophetic 
threatening  of  the  Almighty. — Around  and  in  her 
midst,  arose  a  wall,  in  competition  with  the  ciouds, 
and  vying  with  a  mountain's  strength;  whose  hundred 
brazen  gates  yawned  at  a  population  whose  num- 
bers historians  have  not  ventured  to  compute:  And, 
within  its  westerly  enclosure,  sublimely  stood  the 
towering  Babel-pyramid,  that  reared  its  ostentatious 
higlit,  in  sacreligious  nearness  to  the  throne  of  God. 
/"Nor  yet  so  near  that  Omnipercipience  could  clearly 
view  it  from  its  own  Emphyrean;  and  therefore  "God 
came  down,  to  see  the  City  and  the  TowerTV  And 
because  it  was  so  fearfully  indicative  of  the  almighty 
power  of  human  strength  combined,  as  to  threaten 
Omnipotence  with  successful  competition,  God  resort- 
ed to  the  surprisingly  ingenious  expedient,  of  con- 
founding, or  diversifying,  human  dialect,  in  order  to 
disperse  its  dangerous  population,  and  divide  its 
threatening  enterprise.  And  so  successful  was  the 
project,  that  Ninus,  the  son  of  him  who  founded 
Babylon,  successfully  emulated  the  enterprise  of  his 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS/  '  145 

father,  in  the  erection  of  magnificent  Ninevah — 
scarcely  inferior  to  Babylon  itself:  Nor  could  Egypt- 
ian Thebes  have  been  much  less,  or  later  in  its  origin, 
than  those  already  named  ! 

f  Now,  would  you  not  deem  yourselves  insulted, 
were  you  offered  an  opinion  of  the  absurdity  and  abor- 
tireness  of  the  foregoing  project;  or  of  the  utter  in- 
consistency of  the  biblical  record,  which  preposter- 
ously derives  all  this  immensity  of  people,  wealth  and 
art  from  Noah's  sons,  within  the  period  Chronology 
designates,  or  one  hundred  and  two  years?  Are  you 
aware,  that  all  the  population,  which  could  have  re- 
sulted from  the  six  prolific  individuals  of  Noah's 
family,  at  the  rate  of  doubling  in  sixteen  years,  au 
increase  more  rapid  than  was  ever  known,  would 
(numberless  than  five  hundred,  in  a  single  century  ?J 
And  do  you  still  believe  great  Babylon  was  peopled 
thence;  and  that  her  millions  were  from  Noah's  loins, 
iti  contravention  of  Nature's  institutes:;  nor  yet,  a 
miracle  pretended  to  be  wrought,  in  aid  of  its  accom- 
plishment?— Then  you  may  fearlessly  proceed  to 
swallow,  both,  Jonah  and  the  whale,  as  a  very  feasi- 
ble employment  for  so  capacious  a  credulity!  J 

And  again;  whose  dialect,  but  that  of  the  builders 
of  the  sacreligious  edifice,  was  confounded?  Or  were 
it  of  the  whole  population  of  the  great  city,  or  even 
of  Chaldea  itself;  that'  were  but  an  inconsiderable 
portion  of  the  inhabitants  of  a  populated  world,  as 
the  Hebrew  tradition  explicitly  and  repeatedly  de- 
clares that  ancient  one  to  have  been.  And,  should 
Ignorance  venture  upon  a  contradiction,  it  may  be 

18 


146  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

r:-'r>:ed,  where  were  Armenia,  Assyria,  Mesopotamia, 
\rani,  or  Syria,  Persia,  or  the  land  of  Nod,  Egypt 
and  Ethiopia?  Were  they  not  already  planted  with 
towns  and  cities;  and  also  bloated  with  a  population, 
from  which  millions  could  be  spared  for  defense,  or 
depredation?  And  \\hen  Abram  first  passed  through 
the  land  of  promise,  were  not  the  Canaanite  and  the 
Perizzite  already  there,  and  in  countless  numbers  too: 
And  were  not  the  Horites,  Amalekites  and  Arnorites 
fsettledttpbn  their  borders?  What  better  than  a  sense- 
i'able,  therefore,  is  the  story  of  the  confusion  of 
human  dialect? 

I  will  not  stop  here  to  recount  the  contemptuous 
reflections,  elicited  by  the  palpable  inconsistencies  of 
\!>r;uri's  going  with  his  family  and  effects,  from  Ha- 
rau,  in  Mesopotamia,  to  a  position  between  Bethel 
'  i,  or  Hai,  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  a  distance,  by 
any  practicable  route,  of  more  than  five  hundred 
miles,  and  that  in  a  country  too,  which  Josephus  says 
"  it  requires  much  time  to  pass  through;  it  being  te- 
dious traveling,  both  in  winter  for  depth  of  clay,  and 
in  summer  for  want  of  water:  and  besides  this,  for 
the  robberies  there  committed,  which  are  not  to  be 
avoided  by  travelers,  but  by  caution  beforehand." 
And  this  long,  difficult  and  dangerous  journey  accom- 
plished, without  a  single  incident,  worthy  to  be  re- 
corded; nor  but  two  short  lines  appropriated  to  the 
whole  account,  viz.  ''And  they  went  forth,  to  go  into 
the  land  of  Canaan;  and  into  the  land  of  Canaan  they 
came." 

Now  do  you  not  deem  this  quite  too   insignificant  a 


THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS.  147 

journal,  for  divine  Inspiration  to  have  suggested  of  so 
inevitably  eventful  a  peregrination?  And  do  you  not 
think,  that  Contempt  would  debase  itself,  were  it  to 
condescend  to  scowl  upon  so  utterly  worthless  an 
item  of  civil  history? 

I  do  not  intend,  in  these  essays,  to  commit  a  waste 
c .f  your,  or  my  own,  time,  by  noticing  unimportant 
discrepancies;  nor,  especially,  by  a  snarling  pedagog- 
ical criticism  of  mere  style:  But  a  specimen  or  two 
just  now  presents  itself,  of  quite  too  singular  a  char- 
acter to,  entirely,  escape  remark. 

(in  Gen.  9,  23,  we  read,  "  And  Shem  and  Japheth 
took  a  garment,  and  laid  it  upon  both  their  shoulders, 
and  went  backward,  and  covered  the  nakedness  of 
their  father;  and  ihe'ir  faces  were  backward,  and  they 
saw  not  their  father's  nakedness."  In  order  to  make 
sense  of  this  quotation,  it  is  necessary  that  the  word 
backward,  as  repeated  in  tlie  same  sentence,  should 
be  inversely  interpreted  in  its  two  positions,  i.  c.  if 
those  two  sons  of  Noah  went  backward,  in  approach- 
ing their  father,  they  could  not,  at  the  same  time, 
have  conveniently  looked  backward,  or  in  the  same 
direction  without  seeing  the  very  nakedness  it  appears 
to  have  been  their  object  to  avoid.  But  this  is  merely 
a  blunder,  and  not  a  falsehood;  And  yet,  it  seems  ex- 
ceptionable, that  Inspiration  should  commit  the  slight- 
est blunder."^ 

It  seems  an  instance  of  somewhat  more  than  austere 
justice,  that  Ham  shall  have  been  cursed  with  perpet- 
ual servitude  to  his  brethren,  for  having  accidentally. 
or  even  purposely,  seen  his  drunken  father's  naked- 


148  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

ness;  and,  therefore,  how  inexcusably  absurd,  to  ac- 
cuse a  being  of  reputed  infinite  justice,  of  having  ar- 
bitrarily transferred  a  penalty  from  the  immediate 
transgressor,  (admitting  Ham  to  have  been  such)  to 
his  unborn,  unparticipant,  innocent  and  irresponsible 
posterity!  And  do  you  seriously  believe  that  God, 
intentionally,  dictated  this  palpable  slander  of  him- 
self; and  that  too,  with  the  fallacious  expectation,  that 
it  would  escape  detection  by  our  imdiscrimiuative 
race?  Then  you  may,  with  the  utmost  consistency, 
admit  the  accuracy  of  the  Jewish  description  of  Him; 
and  that  He  had  really  forgotten,  or  never  knew,  how 
cunning,  an  intercourse  with  Satan  would  make  man- 
kind. 

We  were,  however,  agreeably  disappointed  upon 
meeting  with  the  subsequent  declaration,  that  the 
subject  of  the  aforesaid  condemnation  should,  never- 
theless, be  also  the  servant  of  the  Lord:  For  it  is 
written,  in  verse  26,  of  the  chapter  referred  to,  "  And 
he  said,  blessed  be  the  Lord  God  of  Shem,  and  Ca- 
naan, (Ham's  posterity)  shall  be  his  servant."  That 
is,  in  its  only  grammatical  acceptation,  the  culprit 
\vas  sentenced,  not  to  be  the  servant  of  Shem,  but  of 
the  Lord  God  of  Shem;  a  somewhat  singular  dispen- 
sation toward  the  subject  of  so  serious  a  retribution 
as  that  of  perpetual  slavery  to  one's  kindred.  (^Nor 
„  should  we  believe  that  Noah  was  better  than  insane, 
having  just  awaked  from  a  state  of  drunken  stupidi- 
ty, to  the  consciousness  of  deserving  himself  to  be 
cursed  J  to  utter  such  an  unnatural  denouncement, 
were  it  not  a  matter  of  subsequent  history,  that  Ca- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  149 

naan  was  really  invaded,  conquered,  enslaved  and 
murdered.  And  were  the  question  asked  by  whom: 
Would  you  not  very  confidently  reply,  by  the  de- 
scendants of  Shem,  through  the  loins  of  Eber  or  He- 
ber  and  Peleg;  and  meanwhile  think  yourselves  fully 
justified  by  the  letter  of  the  record?  Then  you 
would  be,  for  once,  palpably  mistaken.  For  to  your 
utter  confusion,  and  that  of  all  believers  in  the  con- 
sistency of  Jewish  supernaturalism,  you  will  find  in 
the  following,  or  27th  verse,  this  declaration,  that 
"  God  shall  enlarge  Japheth,  and  he  (Japheth  shall 
dwell  in  the  tents  of  Shem;  and  Canaan  shall  be  his 
(Japheth's)  servant;"  which  seems  not,  however,  to 
have  been  historically  verified. 

It  is  explicitly  declared  by  this  theological  oracle, 
that  Eber  was  the  father  of  the  Hebrews,  and  the 
great-grand-son  of  Shem;  from  whom  Peleg  was  the 
first,  and  Abram  the  sixth  generation:  And  that  the 
Hebrews,  or  descendants  of  Shem,  were  the  conquer- 
ors and  enslavers  of  unfortunate.  Canaan.  But  the 
record  is  a  direct  contradiction  of  this,  wherein  it 
says,  as  above,  "  that  Japheth,  (or  Japhet)  shall  dwell 
in  the  tents  of  Shem,  and  Canaan  shall  be  his  (that  is 
Japheth's  servant:"  Japheth  being,  meanwhile,  rep- 
resented as  the  father  of  the  nations  who  inhabited  the 
isles  of  the  Gentiles;  or,  as  Josephus  says,  the  father 
of  the  Galls,  Sythians,  Medes,  Greeks,  Thracians, 
Cyprians,  &c.  &c.  by  whom  the  primitive  Canaanites 
seem  not  to  have  been  at  all  disturbed. 

It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  the  texts  under  conside- 
ration, are  grossly  inconsistent,  either  in  their  construe- 


150  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISM?. 

tion  or  import.  They  either  do  not  convey  the  mean- 
ing of  the  writer,  or  he  was  guilty  of  promulgating 
folsehoodi.  For,  it  is,  at  best,  historically  true,  that 
the  Canaanites  were  neither  the  servants  of  God  nor 
Japheth. 

Thus  ends  our  criticism  of  the  syntax  adopted  hy 
supernatural  Inspiration;  but  not  with  its  other  nu- 
merous connections. 

I  would  he  indulged  in  a  single  remark,  upon  the 
discrepancy  observable  between  the  pentateuch  of 
Moses,  and  the  history  of  Josephus,  in  regard  to  the 
length  of  each  of  the  seven  generations  between  Shem 
and  Tcrah. 

While  the  former  allows  but  thirty-two  years  and  a 
half,  as  the  average  length  of  a  generation,  the  latter 
extends  it  to  a  little  less  than  one  hundred  and  thirty- 
two.  Arphaxad  is  also  declared  by  the  former,  to 
have  been  bom  but  two  years  after  the  deluge,  while 
the  latter,  as  emphatically,  declares  it  to  have  been 
twelve.  This  may*be  taken  as  very  plausible  evi- 
dence, at  least,  that  different,  if  not  numerous  tradi- 
tions had  been  preservedof  the  same  historical  events, 
respecting  the  Hebrew  people. 

Now,  it  is  recorded  of  the  patriarchs  of  these  seven 
generations,  that  they  lived  to  the  average  age  of 
three  hundred  and  thirty  years;  not,  however  gradu- 
ally decreasing,  as  Josephus  declares,  but  between  the 
consecutive  ones  of  Eber  and  Peleg,  abruptly  reduced 
to  little  more  than  one  half;  or  from  464,  to  239,  year-. 
And  do  you  think  it  credible,  that,  while  human  litV 
was  prolonged  to  380  years,  that  connubial  eligibility 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  151 

shall  have  arrived  earlier  than  when  it  was  abridged 
to  120,  as  the  case  appears  to  have  been  with  Moses 
and  his  cotemporaries?  And  here  I  am  reminded  of 
a  somewhat  striking  disparity  between  the  account 
given  by  Moses  and  Josephus,  respecting  the  time  and 
manner  of  the  aforesaid  abridgement  of  human  life. 
f  We  find,  agreeable  to  the  biblical  chronology,  that, 
in  the  year  two  thousand  three  hundred  and  forty 
nine  before  the  present  era,  God  said  "  my  Spirit 
shall  not  always  strive  with  man,  for  that  he  also  is 
flesh;  yet  his  days  shall  be  a  hundred  and  twenty 
years."  At  what  period  of  human  history,  this  decree 
is  to  be  literally  and  permanently  enforced,  remains 
for  futurity  to  determine,  since  it  has  not  been  veri- 
fied in  the  past,  j 

Subsequently'™  this  declaration,  Hebrew  genealo- 
gy informs  us,  that  the  average  length  of  human  life, 
during  eleven  generations, was  three  hundred  and  five 
years  nearly.  And  we  learn  from  the  poetry  of  David, 
Ps.  90,  10;  That  the  days  of  man'i  years  were  three 
score  years,  and  ten;  and  that  if  by  reason  of 
strength,  they  were  extended  to  fourscore  years,  yet 
their  strength  was  labor  and  sorrow;  for  it  was  soon 
cut  off,  and  they  were  flown  away.  Hence  it  may  be 
very  reasonably  concluded,  that,  during  the  last  three 
thousand  years,  the  period  of  human  life  has  been 
very  nearly  as  it  is  at  present;  and  therefore  the  val- 
idity of  Inspiration,  in  this  instance,  apparently,  not 
a  little  suspicious.  But  Josephus,  failing  as  may  be 
supposed,  to  find,  amongst  the  traditions  of  his  coun- 
trymen, a  satisfactory  reason,  for  the  abridgment  of 


152  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

human  life,  has  employed  his  own  ingenuity,  with 
laughable  success,  in  constructing  one,  viz.,  because 
Moses  happened  to  live  one  hundred  and  twenty  years, 
God,  therefore,  in  respect  of  him,  determined  that  to 
be  the  length  of  human  life:  A  most  exalted  idea  of 
Deity,  and  of  the  motives  by  which  He  is  actuated. 
Another  circumstance  also,  which  bears  strongly  upon 
the  validity  of  the  Mosaic  account  of  the  shortness 
of  the  seven  generations,  between  Shern  and  Terah, 
is,  that  the  average  length  of  the  eight  subsequent 
ones,  or  those  from  Terah  to  Moses,  inclusive,  was 
about  46  1-4  years,  or  nearly  13  3-4  longer  than  the 
preceding,  which  seems  to  be  altogether  dissonant 
with  the  principle  of  gradual  abridgment,  therein 
clearly  inculcated. 

This  however,  though  apparently  too  absurd  to 
have  been  committed  by  divine  Inspiration,  is  com- 
paratively too  trifling  to  expend  a  serious  objection 
upon.  And  thus,  it  may  be  said  of  its  innumerable 
associates;  such  as  the  profane  implication  of  God 
iu  the  fraudulent  imposture,  practiced  upon  the  un- 
wary Egyptian  King,  wherein,  at  Abram's  instigation, 
Sarai  disavowed  her  connubial  relationship,  and  pal- 
pably., as  did  her  husband,  also,  perverted  the  truth, 
by  an  avowal  of  consanguinity  that  did  not  exist; 
ffor  she  was  not  his  father's,  but  his  uncles  daughter?) 
And  do  you  think  it  probable,  that  God  connived  with 
such  a  black-leg  cheat  as  Abram,  to  circumvent,  abuse 
defraud  and  frighten  honest  Pharaoh?  And  such  he 
surely  was,  for  aught  the  record  tells  us:  For  it  is  a 
fair  conclusion  from  history  itself,  that  the  custom 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS,  15$ 


then,  not  only  excused,  but  even  justified  Pharaoh's 
contemplated  intercourse  with  Sarai,  had  she  been 
unmarried.  Wherefore  then,  was  Pharaoh  plagued 
with  great  plagues?  Was  it  as  a  punishment  for  the 
witless  confidence  he  placed  in  the  word  of  God's 
particular  favorite;  as  though  he  were  himself  re- 
sponsible for  a  mere  contemplated  delinquency;  and 
that  too,  one  into  which  he  had  been  cheated,  by  the 
willful  misrepresentation  of  righteous  Abram?  Or 
did  God,  really,  contrary  to  any  rational  expectation 
of  him,  suggest  the  expedient  of  a  palpable  false- 
hood, and  a  most  reprehensible  fraud,  in  order  to 
subserve  the  interests  of  a  favorite,  which  could  not 
have  been  honestly  accomplished;  thus  admitting  Om- 
niscience to  have  fallen  into  a  dilemma,  wherein,  infi- 
nite justice  was  unavoidably  sacrificed  to  the  imbe- 
cility of  almighty  power?  ^But  this  was  a  Hebrew 
god,  from  which  nothing  better  could  have  been  ra- 
tionally expected  JAnd  yet  both  orthodox  and  unor- 
thodox theology  owns  such  a  character  to  be  the  ob- 
ject of  its  most  pious  veneration;  and  would  damn, 
to  endless  wo,  whoever  ventures  a  dissent  from  the 
justice  of  its  claim!  Alas,  that  superstitious  Tyran- 
ny shall  have  scourged  mankind,  so  long  and  safely; 
nor  even  now,  afford  a  hope  that  its  dotage  will  ever 
yield  a  chance  for  successful  revolution. 

But  what  is  stranger  still,  in  this  most  strange  nar- 
ration, (especially  wherein  a  Jewish  god's"  insanity  is 
not  concerned)  is  that  Sarai  should  have  retained,  un- 
til her  ninetieth  year,  and  in  that  prematuring  climate 
too,  so  many  of  the  fascinations  of  her  youthful  beau- 

19 


13. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


ty,  as  to  supersede,  with  king  Abimelech,  the  fairest 
of  all  the  countless  damsels  he  might  command;  and 
who,  without  a  question,  as  the  eastern  fashion  was, 
were  emulous  of  domestication,  within  the  precincts 
of  his  harem,  or  moral  slaughter-house. 

What  induced  Abram  to  go  into  the  south,  in  a 
journey  from  Egypt  to  Canaan,  situated  as  those  pla- 
ces are  in  relation  to  each  other,  i.  e.  east  north  east, 
and  west  south  west,  having  Ramesees  or  its  neigh- 
borhood for  the  Egyptian  extremity,  whereby  dis- 
tance and  difficulties  must  have  been  continually  in- 
creased, is  a  question,  apparently  somewhat  difficult 
of  solution. 

Again — Do  you  believe  that  Abram  and  his  nephew, 
Lot,  acquired  in  Egypt,  during  a  residence,  scarcely 
more  than  sufficient  to  relate  the  incredible  story, 
such  numbers  of  <c  sheep,  and  oxen,  and  he-asses,  and 
f  Men-servants,  and  she-asses,  and  camels,  that  thel  and, 
about  Bethel  and  Ai,  was  not  able  to  bear  them — And 
that,  notwithstanding  the  Canaanite  and  the  Perizzite 
dwelled  then  in  the  land/'  they  successfully  assumed 
the  ownership  of  the  country,  and  peaceably  appro- 
priated its  produce  to  themselves?  ^It  must  have  been 
no  common  enterprise,  that  made  these  Hebrews  so 
quickly  and  immensely  richh  For  were  Pharaoh, 
really  so  contemptible  a  dupe  as  to  have  been  cheated 
into  an  undeserved  liberality  to  Abram,  while  the 
Hebrew's  willfully  corrupt  perversion  of  the  truth, 
ought  to  have  obtained  his  imprisonment  in  its  stead; 
accounting  thus,  for  his  pecuniary  success,  the  ques- 
tion still  remains,  how  Lot  should  also  have  become 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  155 

so  rich, (notwithstanding  Pharaoh,  most  judiciously, 
banished  them  all  his  country,  as  soon  as  he  became 
acquainted  with  their  dangerous  duplicityj  And  yet 
you  are  obnoxious  to  the  uncomely  epithets,  infidel 
and  heretic,  unless  you  believe  that  these  two  He- 
brews drove  countless  flocks  and  herds,  from  Egypt 
to  the  land  of  Canaan;  and,  'unmolested,  fed  them 
there,  amongst  the  towns  and  cities  of  its  native  pop- 
pulation,  and,  without  rebuke,  monopolized  between 
them,  a  peopled  territory,  much  more  extensive  than 
a  petty  kingdom  of  that  ancient  time.  And  thus  the 
case  is  biblically  reported:  Or  what  meant  Abrarn, 
when  he  thus  exclaimed?  "  Is  not  the  whole  land  be- 
fore thee?  Separate  thyself,  I  pray  thee,from  me:  if 
thou  wilt  take  the  left  hand,  then  I  will  go  to  the 
right;  or  if  thou  depart  to  the  right  hand,  I  will  go  to 
the  left."  Or  wherefore  does  the  record  say,  that 
"  Lot  chose  him  all  the  plain  of  Jordan — and  dwelled 
in  the  cities  of  the  plain:"  And  that  kings  and  people 
cheerfully  surrendered  their  possessions  to  these  un- 
ceremonious intruders. 

And  was  it  consonant  with  the  genius  of  the  times, 
or  the  character  of  human  nature,  that  these  two 
Chaldeans,  themselves  vagrants,  should  have  induced 
an  army  of  free  Egyptians,  (for  slaves  were  at  the 
command  of  others)  to  abandon  their  homes  and 
country,  for  the  very  unseductive  consideration  of  be- 
coming the  servants  of  strangers,  and  perhaps  of  vag- 
abonds, in  a  strange,  if  not  a  barbarous,  land  f  Anfl 
is  it  consistent  with  the  fashion  of  those  ancient,  pa- 
triarchal times,  where  Youth  was,  not  onlv,  taught  an 

" 


156  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

impious  respect  for  age;  but  where  it  was  indebted  to 
obedience  for  life  itself,  that  experienced  Age  should 
voluntarily  disclaim  respect,  and  surrender  its  author- 
it}',  opinions  and  partialities  to  youthful  inexperience, 
as  Abram  appears  to  have  done,  with  regard  to  his 
nephew  Lot  ? 

It  is  not  to  be  expected,  that  the  most  ignorant  and 
enthusiastic  devotee  of  Jutliasm,  will  presume  upon 
the  fictitious  excuse,  for  his  favorite  patriarch,  that 
the  territory  of  Canaan  was,  at  the  time  in  question, 
nn  uninhabited  desert,  and  therefore  rightfully  subject 
to  the  occupancy  of  whoever  would  take  the  trouble 
to  sit  down  upon  it.  On  the  contrary,  he  must  feel 
himself  effectually  refuted,  by  the  revelations  of  his 
own  oracle,  which  emphatically  declare  that  five  dis- 
tinct, (though  doubtless  petty)  monarchies  were  al- 
ready established,  within  the  limits  of  the  land  of 
promise;  beside  a  much  greater  number  upon  its 
immediate  borders:  And  to  which  may  be  added  an 
enumeration  of  cities,  emulating  both  the  antiquity 
and  population  of  the  oldest  and  greatest  of  gray- 
haired  Egypt. 

Notwithstanding  the  foregoing  account  is  particu- 
larly obnoxious  to  the  severest  criticism,  it  may,  nev- 
ertheless, be  deemed  the  veriestsubliraatiqu  of  con- 
sistency, when  compared  with  that  given  in  the  fol- 
lowing chapter,  (Jen.  14;  wherein  it  is  recorded,  that 
ihe  several  kings  of  the  earliest  and  most  numerously 
populated  countries  of  Asia,  combined  their  military 
forces,  in  a  marauding  expedition  pf  a  thousand 
miles,  against  a  half  dozen  tribes  of  Canaanitish  sava- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  157 

i 

ges.  And  you  will  allow  me  here  to  express  my 
doubts,  whether  the  writer,  compiler,  translator,  or 
any  credentive  individual  of  its  millions  of  readers, 
has  ever  seriously  contemplated  the  absurdities  of  this 
particular1  chapter,  which  ought  to  have  shamed  Mun- 
chausen  himself,  had  he  been  its  reader,  out  of  his 
comparatively  puny  attempts  at  the  marvelous  and 
absurd. 

Here  are  four  kings,  represented  as  personally  lea- 
ving their  own  fertile,  rich  and  populated  plains,  in- 
cluding an  aggregate  territory  of  more  than  twenty- 
two  thousand  square  miles,  or  nearly  thirty  times  the 
area  of  all  Judea,  in  order  to  prosecute,  at  least,  u 
twelve-month's  expedition  against,  what  must  have 
been,  at  that  time,  and  with  them,  unheard  of  kings 
and  nations;  and  that  with  an  army,  although  nations 
had-combined  to  form  it,  so  verily  contemptible,  that 
the  tythe  of  a  single  household  was  able  to  conquer 
and  disperse  it,  with  as  much  safety  and  expedition,  as 
though  it  were  a  flock  of  sheep. 

It  is  also  said,  that  this  combined  army  of  Persians, 
Chaldeans,  Assyrians,  &c.,  passed  entirely  through 
the  land  of  Canaan,  from  north  to  south,  by  the  way 
of  Ham,  Ashteroth  Karnaim,  Kiriathaim  and  Mount 
Seir,  unto  El-paran,  or  God  of  beauty,  which  is  by 
the  wilderness,  (of  Paran)  a  place,  by  the  by,  whose 
locality  is  not  anywhere  designated;  pillage  and  ex- 
termination, meanwhile,  marking  their  murderous 
progress;  that  they  returned,  (from  where  is  only  to 
be  imagined)  and  cafrie  to  Eu-rnishpat,  which  is  Ka- 
desh,  or  the  Waters  of  strife,  noted  as  being  about 


158  THEOLOGICAL,    CRITICISMS. 

fifteen  mile*  west  of  Mount  Hor,  in  the  desert  of 
Zin,  more  than  a  hundred  miles  of  reputedly  imprac- 
ticable desert  intervening,  between  it  and  the  nearest 
boundary  of  the  land  of  Canaan.  And  what  sent 
them  there,  neither  human  nor  superhuman- sense  has 
ventured  to  suggest.  But  what  is  most  singular  is, 
that  while  there,  they  shall  have  destroyed  two  na- 
tions, or  tribes  in  different  directions,  and  at  very 
considerable  distances.  And  thus  it  reads:  "And 
they  returned  and  came  to  En-mishpat,  which  is  Ka- 
desh,  nnd  smote  all  the  country  of  the  Amalekites, 
and  also  the  Amorites,  that  dwelt  in  Hazezon-tamar." 
Now,  this  text  appears  not  to  be  susceptible  of  any 
other  plausible  interpretation  than  the  following,  viz: 
First,  That  these  invaders  came  upon  Kadesh,  on 
their  return.  The  query,  therefore  is,  from  whence? 
And  the  answer  is  to  be  found,  if  anywhere,  in  the 
immediate  context,  which  reads  thus:  "And  in  the 
fourteenth  year  came  Chedorlaorner,  and  the  kings 
that  \vere  with  him,  and  smote  the  Rephaims,  or 
giants,  in  Ashteroth  Karnaim,  and  the  Zuzims,  or 
door-posts,  in  Ham,  and  the  Emims,  or  terrors,  in 
Shaveh  Kiriathim,  and  the  Horites  in  their  mount 
Seir,  unto  El-paran,  which  is  by  the  wilderness.5' 
*ind  they  returned  to  En-mishpat,  which  is  Kadesh. 
Here  then,  lies  the  difficulty  with  our  first  proposition; 
that  En-mishpat,  or  Kadesh,  is  a  great  way  farther 
from  Canaan,  than  any  part  of  the  wilderness  (of  Pa- 
ran)  by  which  El-paran  is  said  to  have  been  situated; 
and,,  therefore,  not  very  conveniently  fallen  upon,  in 
the  manner  described.  Nor,  second,  can  it  be  more 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  159 

satisfactorily  settled,  by  an  arbitrary  transfer  of  the 
wilderness  of  Zin,  upon  whose  easterly  border  Kadesh 
is  situated,  to  an  unnatural  position  between  Idumea 
and  the  country  of  Amalek.  For  it  would  be  passing 
strange  that  the  Amorites,  who  dwelt  in  Hazezon-ta- 
inar,  should  be  destroyed  at  Kadesh,  situated,  at  least 
sixty  miles  south  of  it;  and,  according  to  a  very  plain 
interpretation,  not  less  than  one  hundred  and  forty, 
with  an  extensive  intervening  wilderness:  Or,  to 
adopt  a  vulgar  truism,  it  appears  quite  improbable, 
that  these  marauders  destroyed  men  and  places  where 
they  were  not. 

This  story  then,  in  plain  English,  reads  thus:  The 
invading  army  passed  through  the  land  of  Canaan, 
from  north-east,  to  south-west;  thence  south-east, 
through  the  territories  of  the  Amalekites  and  Idume- 
ans,  to  En-mishpat,  upon  the  east  border  of  the  ddsert 
of  Zin,  a  distance  from  Canaan,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  of,  at  least,  a  hundred  miles,  having  left  the 
desert  of  Paran  on  their  right.  That  here,  they  de- 
stroyed the  Amalekites,  situated  a  hundred  miles  to 
the  north-west;  and  also  the  Amorit.es  at  the  north- 
west extremity  of  the  Dead  sea,  and  little  less  than  a 
hundred  miles,  by  any  practicable  route,  from  the  de- 
voted city  of  Sodom.  Hence  the  enemy  must  have 
passed  and  repassed,  both  Sodom  and  Gomorrah;  and 
subsequently,  retraced  the  aforesaid  distance,  [admit- 
ting that  they  committed  depredations  at  Hazezon- 
tarnar,]  in  order  to  sack  these  two  great  cities,  which  it 
appears,  they  effectually  accomplished.  And  all  this 
protracted,  successive,  murderous  invasion  prosecuted 


160  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

in  the  very  neighborhood  of  Abram,  without  his  being 
apprised  of  such  an  expedition,  until  "there  came 
one.  that  had  escaped,"  and  told  him  of  the  overthrow 
and  ravage  of  the  cities;  and  also  of  the  capture  and 
abduction  of  his  nephew  Lot. 

"  And  when  Abram  heard  that  his  brother  (nephew) 
was  taken  captive,  he  armed  his  trained  servants, 
born  in  his  own  house,  three  hundred  and  eighteen," 
&.e.  And  in  this  there  seerns  to  be  an  inconsistency, 
that  must  puzzle  the  very  necromancy  of  Theology  to 
rectify.  How  is  it  possible,  it  may  be  asked,  that 
Abram  should  have  had  three  hundred  and  eighteen 
men  of  war  born  in  his  own  house,  which  requires 
the  admission  of  an  equal  number  of  coeval  females; 
so  that  of  persons  of  all  ages,  required  in  the  premi- 
ses, the  patriarch's  family  must  have  consisted  of  more 
than*  twelve  hundred. — A  notable  family,  to  be  sure, 
for  the  time  and  circumstances;  and  yet  Orthodox 
Credulity  finds  no  difficulty  in  swallowing  it.  It  may 
be  further  remarked  of  this  affair,  that  Abram's  won- 
derful defeat  of  the  combined  Asiatic  army,  was  ef- 
fected antecedently  to  his  cohabitation  with  Sarai's 
Egyptian  handmaid,  whose  son,  Ishmael,  was  born 
when  Abram  was  eighty-six  years  old;  he  having,  as 
Josephus  relates,  been  driven  from  his  home  in  Meso- 
potamia, by  a  persecution  raised  against  his  superior 
knowledge,  at  the  age  of  seventy-five.  ^The  interval, 
therefore,  between  his  emigration,  in  the  character  of 
a  disinherited  fortune-hunter,  and  his  magnificent  mil- 
itary exploit,  can  have  been  but  about  ten  years. — A 
period  scarcely  adequate  to  the  rearing,  from  birth,  ot" 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  161 

six  hundred  and  thirty-six  persons,  male  and  female, 
of  an  age  fit  for  war,  or  from  twenty,  to  fifty  years. 
Nor  is  the  difficulty  susceptible  of  any  rational  solu- 
tion whatever,  except  upon  the  principle  of  miracu- 
lous interposition,  which  was  neglected  to  be  intro- ) 
duced  upon  this  particular  occasion.^  \ 

Upon  the  fictitious  nonsense,  about  the  king  of  Sa- 
lem, we  may  be  allowed  to  present  Theology  with 
the  following  interrogation.  fAnd  who  was  this  won- 
derful Melchizedek — and  whence  and  wherefore,  this 
archetype  of  Christ^-this  reference  and  exemplar  of 
all  future  piety — this  righteous  king  and  priest  of  the 
most  high  God,  presiding  over  a  Gentile  people,  with 
whom  God  was  a  stranger;  and  to  whom  even  his 
name  was  yet  unknown,  and  who  were  already  sen- 
tenced to  extermination,  for  their  incorrigible,  prede- 
termined impiety,  which  God  himself  was  unable,  or  1 
unwilling  to  reform.  *i 

To  contemplate  this  righteous,  unbegotten,  unpro- 
creant  king  of  a  tribe  of  pagan  savages,  in  the  char- 
acter of  high-priest  of  an  undeveloped  theology;  and 
offering  sacrifice  in  the  unknown  name  of  an  unknown 
God,  appears  not  much  unlike  the  Genius  of  future 
science  seeking  a  Golgotha,  as  the  theater  of  its  lite- 
rary enterprise. 

Again,  Gen.  15,  13,  "And  he  (God)  said  unto 
Abram,  know  of  a  surety,  that  thy  seed  shall  be  a 
stranger  in  a  land  that  is  not  theirs,  and  shall  serve 
them;  and  they  shall  afflict  them  four  hundred  years," 

Now  this  declaration  of  the  Almighty  must  be  ad- 
mitted to  refer  to  the  subjugation  of  the  Israelites,  in 

20 


162  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

Egypt,   some  two  hundred  years  after,  or  to  no  event 
that  hutnan  history  has  ever  recorded. 

This  period  of  four  hundred  years  is  not  that,  how- 
ever, to  which  the  Scriptures  testify.  At  Ex.  12.  40, 
it  thus  reads:  "  Now  the  sojourning  of  the  children 
of  Israel,  who  dwelt  in  Egypt,  was  four  hundred  and 
thirty  years."  And  a  corresponding  declaration,  in 
the  character  of  a  reference,  is  found  at  Gal.  3,  17. 
And  as  though  it  were  intended  to  establish  a  palpable 
disagreement  of  relation,  a  reference,  in  Acts  7.  6,  is 
also  made  to  the  period  of  four  hundred  years.  Nor 
is  the  difficulty  at  all  alleviated  by  a  reference  to  the 
narrative  of  the  Jewish  historian,  whose  authority, 
especially  upon  the  point  in  question,  should  not  be 
treated  with  indifference.  He  says  that  the  whole 
period,  from  Abram's  going  out  of  Haran  of  Meso- 
potamia, to  the  exodus  of  the  Israelites,  was  four 
hundred  and  thirty  years;  the  half  of  which,  or  two 
hundred  and  fifteen  years  only,  were  expended  in  the 
latter  place.  Nor  is  it  a  reasonable  conclusion,  that 
the  Hebrews  were  enslaved  by  the  Egyptians,  until 
the  death  of  Joseph,  on  whose  account  they  are  said 
to  have  been  particularly  favored.  Now  Joseph's 
death  occurred  when  he  was  110  years  old,  or  seventy 
years  after  his  father  and  family  removed  from  Ca- 
naan to  Egypt.  It  is  hence,  chronologically  true,  that 
the  term  of  actual,  Hebrew  slavery  could  not  have 
exceeded  two  hundred  and  fifteen  years,  less  by  the 
aforesaid  seventy,  or  one  hundred  and  forty-five;  a 
number,  essentially  different  from  those  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. Nor  can  there  be  a  reasonable  doubt,  that  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  163 

Jewish  historian's  is  the  most  reasonable  account. 
For  there  were  but  three  generations  between  Jacob 
and  Moses,  viz.,  Levi,  Kohath  and  Amrain,  which, 
if  we  allow  the  most  reasonable  term  of  forty-five 
years  for  each,  will  amount  to  one  hundred  and  thirty- 
five,  adding  to  which  eighty,  the  age  of  Moses  at  the 
time  of  the  exodus,  we  have  two  hundred  and  fifteen; 
the  number  of  years  appropriated  by  Josephus;  and, 
doubtless,  the  most  satisfactory  conclusion,  the  ques- 
tion will  admit  of. 

Again,  verse  18:  lt  In  the  same  day,  the  Lord  made 
a  covenant  with  Abram,  saying,  Unto  thy  seed  have  I 
given  this  land,  from  the  river  of  Egypt,  unto  the 
great  river,  the  river  Euphrates."  How  punctually, 
or  consistently,  this  pledge  of  the  Almighty  was  re- 
deemed, consonantly  with  its  intelligible  import,  may 
be  safely  left  to  the  decision  of  each  individual,  who 
shall  have  made  himself,  at  all,  acquainted  with  Jew- 
ish political  history.  The  entire  invalidation  of  the 
foregoing  announcement  is  contained  in  this  emphatic, 
historical  declaration.  That  the  Jews,  at  no  time, 
from  their  Mosaic  introduction  into  the  land  of  Ca- 
naan, until  their  final  overthrow  and  dispersion  by  the 
Roman  Titus,  adopted  the  nationalizing  policy  of 
colonization,  or  of  establishing  territorial  possession, 
beyond  the  narrow,  geographical  limits  of  their  own 
blessed  Palestine:  And  that  the  few  insignificant  con- 
quests, they  were  enabled  to  effect  in  Syria,  Arabia 
and  Egypt,  passed  away,  like  the  vapor  of  a  summer 
morning. 

We  do   not  omit  to  fiotice  the  following,   or  16th 


164  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

chapter,  because  it  is  barren  of  food  for  Criticism; 
but  that  it  is  too  insipid  to  interrupt  our  pursuit  of 
more  exquisite  viands,  we  smell  amongst  its  younger 
relatives.  All  but  a  single  comment,  therefore,  we 
will  forego,  viz:  That  Abram  is  herein  represented  as 
having  set  the  first  example  of  bigamy;  which,  if 
true,  would  seem  to  smack  of  inconsistency,  in  God's 
peculiar  favorite — the  acknowledged  patriarch  of  the 
very  Christianity  by  which  if  is  prohibited.  But  this 
too,  Theology  receives,  as  being  geometrically  right; 
or  right,  in  all  its  parts  and  bearings.  And  here,  I 
may  not  omit  to  notice  a  particular  corroboration  of  a 
former  remark,  that  Abram's  sojourn  in  Egypt  must 
have  been,  at  most,  a  short  one — scarcely  longer  than 
to  have  afforded  opportunity  for  relating  his  story. 
"  And  Sarai,  Abram's  wife,  took  Hagar,  her  maid, 
the  Egyptian,  after  Abram  had  dwelt  ten  years  in  the 
land  of  Canaan,  and  gave  her  to  her  husband,  Abram, 
to  be  his  wife,"  of  whom  Ishmael  was  born  the  fol- 
lowing year,  or  when  Abram  was  eighty  six  years 
old;  leaving,  apparently,  a  very  inadequate  opportu- 
nity for  the  accumulation  of  wealth,  in  Egypt. 

Again,  the  8th  verse  of  the  17th  chapter  reads  thus: 
<£  And  I  will  give  unto  thee,  and  to  thy  seed  after 
thee,  the  land  wherein  thou  art  a  stranger,  all  the 
land  of  Canaan,  for  an  everlasting  possession." 

That  Abram  shall  have  been  deemed  a  stranger  in 
a  country,  no  more  extensive  than  Canaan,  over  most 
of  which  for  ten  successive  years,  his,  or  his  neph- 
ew's, countless  animals  must  have  roved  for  suste- 
nance; and  through  the  whole  length  of  which  he  had 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  165 

himself  tracked  an  army  of  invaders  to  its  utter  de- 
feat and  dispersion,  is  not  a  little  difficult  to  admit. 
Nor  do  we  think  it  needs  but  common  sense  and 
knowledge,  to  determine  how  very  imperfectly  this 
promise  of  the  Almighty  has  been  fulfilled.  And  yet 
the  second-sight  of  Spiritualism  sees,  as  clearly  as  it 
does  its  own  infallibility,  that  this  has  been,  or  is  to 
be,  punctiliously  performed. 

In  the  18th  chapter,  it  is  written,  verse  1st,  "And 
the  Lord  appeared  unto  him"  (Abraham) — verse  2d,  in 
the  form  of  three  men;  and  ver«e  8th,  that  "  they  did 
eat."  It  really  seems  somewhat  dissonant  with  the 
most  improved  present  state  of  opinion,  that  God 
should  have  found  it  necessary  to  assume  the  form  of 
three  men,  in  order  to  succeed  in  making  a  single 
communication:  And  more  especially,  that  these  mere 
forms  should  have  positively  devoured  a  whole  calf, 
with  adequate  bread  and  trimmings.  It,  unquestion- 
ably, requires  a  great  deal  of  stupidity  or  credulity  to 
believe  this  ghostly  gormandizing!  And  though  it  is 
not  scripturally  asserted,  that  these  aparitions  actual- 
ly ate  the  whole  calf;  yet  it  is  both  scripturally  and 
rationally  admissible,  that,  with  their  almighty  appe- 
tites and  capacities,  they  might  have  eaten  a  whole 
calf,  and  even  a  whole  herd,  if  they  would — at  least 
as  well  as  to  have  eaten  at  all. 

And  does  it  appear  entirely  consistent  with  a  ration- 
al idea  of  God,  that,  as  in  verse  13th,  the  Almighty 
should  have  really  enquired  of  Abram,  wherefore  Sa- 
rah laughed;  and  that  too,  with  the  eternal  fore- 
knowledge, that  the  great-great-grandrnother  of  the 
Son  of  God  would  answer  falsely? 


166  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

At  verse  14th,  the  question  is  asked,  by  God  himself, 
11  Is  any  thing  too  hard  for  the  Lord?"  And  what 
could  have  been  more  absurd  than  this  inquiry,  when 
addressed  to  those  oriental  savages?  They  might, 
with  quite  as  much  propriety,  have  been  asked  if  they 
could  calculate  an  eclipse,  or  measure  the  diameter  of 
the  sun:  For  they  did  not  yet,  possess  the  lean  ad- 
vantage of  the  fallacies,  that  Moses  afterwards  pro- 
mulgated; and,  therefore  could  have  had  no  other  no- 
tions of  God's  character,  than  he  had  already  revealed 
to  them.  And  even  Moses  himself  seems fift  to  have 
had  no  idea  of  God's  omnisciency,  nor  omnipcroipi- 
ency;  since,  in  verses  20  and  21,  God  is  made  to  de- 
clare that,  because  of  the  cry  of  Sodom  and  Gomor- 
rah, and  of  their  very  grievous  sin,  "  I  will  go  down 
now,  and  see  whether  they  have  done  altogether  ac- 
cording to  the  cry  of  it,  which  is  come  unto  me;  and 
if  not,  I  will  know." 

This  language,  which  is  impiously  detractive  of 
God's  admissible  character,  could  never  have  been 
adopted  but  by  the  extremest  Ignorance  or  Depravi- 
ty !  Nor  did  God  ever  make  so  contemptible  a  revela- 
tion of  himself!  But,  to  resume  our  acquaintance 
with  God's  spiritual  proxies,  or  rather  his  shadowy 
self.  That  the  three  men  before  spoken  of,  were  sur- 
prisingly singular  personages,  even  for  ghosts,  appears 
from  the  following.  In  verse  22d  it  is  said,  in  conclu- 
sion of  God's  determination  to  go  down  to  Sodom, 
and  inquire  out  the  truth,  u  And  the  men  turned  their 
faces  from  thence  and  went  toward  Sodorn."  And 
meanwhile,  God  is  prudently  managing  his  own  affairs, 


THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 


1G7 


in  his  own  proper  person,  as  we  learn,  at  the  close  of 
the  same  verse,  which  says,  ct  But  Abram  stood  yet 
before  the  Lord."'  And  here,  we  find  the  Lord  con- 
descends to  stop,  and  hold  a  formal  interview  with 
Abraham/ who  presumes  to  prosecute  a  true  horse- 
jockey  banter  with  God  Almighty;  and  when  termina- 
ted, they  part,  upon  their  usual  familiar,  friendly 
terms,  each  going,  leisurely.,  about  his  own  business.} 

In  chapter  19,  verse  1st,  it  is  written,  "And  there 
came  two  angels  to  Sodom,  at  even;  and  Lot  sat  in 
the  gate  of  Sodom.  And  he  said,  (to  the  two  angels) 
Behold  now  my  lords,  turn  in  I  pray  you  into  your 
servant's  house"  &,c.  "  And  they  said,  nay;  but  we 
will  abide  in  the  street  all  night.  And  he  pressed 
upon  them  greatly;  and  they  turned  in  unto  him,  and 
entered  into  his  house;  and  he  made  them  a  feast,  and 
did  bake  unleavened  bread,  and  they  did  eat."  Here 
then,  we  find  two  of  the  three  men,  alias,  angels  of 
God,  alias,  shadows,  who,  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
are  said  to  have  conversed  and  ate  with  Abraham, 
eating  also  with  Lot;  and  that  they,  after  God  deter- 
mined to  go  down  to  Sodom,  to  learn  the  truth  of 
what  he  had  heard  of  it,  "  turned  their  faces — and 
went  toward  Sodom."  It  seems,  therefore,  that  they 
must  have  lost  a  companion  upon  the  way,  or  that 
they  left  him  to  personate  God,  in  the  aforesaid  con- 
ference with  Abraham. 

That  Lot,  a  roving,  Arab  herdsman,  with  his  many 
thousand  cattle,  and  an  army  of  domestics,  requiring 
a  territory  for  their  accommodation,  and  \vho>  a  little 
while  before,  is  said  to  have  pitched  his  tent  toward 


163  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

Sodom,  (not  built  his  house  therein)  should  have  been 
thus  cooped  up  within  the  gate  of  the  city,  with  no 
other  household  than  his  wife  and  two  provident  and 
precocious  daughters,  Avho  were  in  the  oddest  of  all 
predicaments,  that  of  married  virgins^as  in  Gen.  19, 
8  and  14,  is  a  circumstance,  apparently ,;absurd  enough 
for  second-adventists  to  believe.  But  perhaps  you 
are,  this  moment,  meditating  a  retort,  in  the  follow- 
ing language,  14,  12.  "And  they  took  Lot,  Abram's 
brother's  son,  wiio  dwelt  in  Sodom,  and  his  goods, 
and  departed."  And  yet,  before  you  shake  your  sides 
to  lameness,  with  laughter  at  your  conscious  victory, 
just  take  a  peep  at  what  Jpsephus  says  about  the  same 
event,  viz:  "Now  when  the  Sodomites  joined  battle 
with  the  Assyrians,  and  the  fight  was  very  obstinate, 
many  of  them  (the  Sodomites)  were  killed,  and  the 
rest  were  carried  captive;  among  which  captives  was 
Lot,  who  had  come  to  assist  the  Sodomites. "- 

But  to  say  another  word  or  two,  of  those  minister- 
ing angels,  or, spiritual  messengers  of  an  omnipresent 
God.  How  strange  it  seems,  that  they  shall  have 
(bund  occasion  to  revise  their  cogitations — to  reverse 
their  predeterminations,  or  expose  themselves  to  per- 
sonal abuse,  from  a  licentious  and  beastly  populace, 
whom  they  had  the  power,  as  it  \vould  clearly  seem, 
to  blast  with  blindness,  paralysis  or  death;  according 
as  their  almighty  pleasure  was  inclined. 

And  do  you  deem  it  other  than  miraculous,  that  Lot 
shall  have  offered,  so  unnaturally,  to  sacrifice,  his  two 
virgin  daughters,  (who,  by  the  by,  were  already  mar- 
ried) to  the  diabolical  concupisence  of  a  countless 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  169 

multitude;  and,  especially,  that  such  an  offer  shall 
have  been  still  more  unnaturally  rejected? 

We  further  find  what  curiotis  things  those  appari- 
tions were,  who,  having  been  repeatedly  transformed, 
and  retransformed,  from  men  to  angels,  and  also  phy- 
sically employed  in  dragging  forth  the  loitering  family 
from  destruction,  were,  finally,  in  consummation  of 
the  strange,  unnecessary  metamorphoses,  sublimated 
to  an  individual  God,  whom  Lot  thus  ventures  to  ad- 
dress: "  O,  not  so  my  Lord!"  And  then  proceeds  to 
banter  him  about  the  place  of  his  retreat,  and  with  as 
good  success,  as  did  his  uncle  Abraham,  in  the  former 
case;  although  the  bargain  turned  out  less  profitably 
than  Lot  had  probably  expected :  For  the  record  says, 
he  soon  left  Zoar,  for  the  mountain,  where  it  is  repu- 
ted that  the  patriarchs  of  Moab  and  Ammon  were 
more  miraculously,  than  immaculately,  begotten. — • 
This  is,  nevertheless,  explicitly  contradicted  by  Jose- 
phus,  who  says,  "  There  (in  Zoar)  it  was  that  he 
(Lot)  lived  a  miserable  life,  on  account  of  his  having 
no  company,  and  his  want  of  provisions." 

With  these  remarks,  which  are  not  a  tythe  of  those 
demanded  by  the  absurdities  of  the  record,  but  which 
are  all,  our  alloted  opportunity  will  allow,  we  shall 
pass,  with  but  an  occasional  criticism,  to  the  story  of 
the  Hebrew  exodus. 

At  Gen.  20,  1,  we  find  that  Abraham  sojourned  at 
Gerar,  between  Kadesh  and  Shur,  which  appears 
somewhat  difficult  of  apprehension;  since  both  the 
latter  places  are  some  miles  to  the  south  of  the  for- 
mer. It  must  have  been,  therefore,  quite  a  supernat- 

21 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

ural  circumstance,  that  Abraham  shall  have  lived. at 
Gerar,  and,  at  the  same  time,  many  miles  south  of  it. 
this  chapter,  we  also  find  a  repetition  of  Abram's 
farcial  denial  of  his  connubial  relation,  and  auain, 
hypocritically,  passing  off  his  wife  as  his  sister,  with 
the  intention  of  prosecuting  a  successful  fraud,  or 
basely  preserving  his  own  skin,  at  the  expense  of  his 
wife's  chastityj  A  dilemma,  it  would  seem,  that  both 
God's  power  and  warm  affection  for  his  favorite, 
should  have  prevented.  Nor  would  it  have  required, 
that  we  can  see,  a  greater  miracle,  than  that  which 
did  prevent  Abimelech's  intended  intercourse. 

Of  Hagar's  repudiation  from  Abraham's  family,  it 
is  written,  Gen.  21,  15,  "And  the  water  (with  which 
Abraham  had  supplied  her)  was  spent  in  the  bottle, 
and  she  cast  the  child  under  one  of  the  shrubs.  Ami 
she  went,  and  sat  down  over  against  him,  a  good  way 
off,  as  it  were  a  bow-shot:  For  she  said,  Let  rne  not 
see  the  death  of  the  child."  And  again,  verse  18, 
And  God  said  to  Hagar,  "Arise,  lift  up  the  lad  and 
hold  him  in  thy  hand,"  &c. 

This  narration,  when  fairly  interpreted,  presents  a 
most  singular  phasis. 

We  find  by  biblical  chronology,  that  Ishrnael  was 
eighteen  years  old  at  the  time  of  Hagar's  repudiation; 
and  therefore,  in  all  probability,  a  very  great  baby,  to 
make  such  childish  work  with;  especially,^fhat  he 
lacked  but  two  years  of  the  period,  at  which  the  He- 
Jbrews  were  made  to  wield  the  war-club.)  And  do  you 
think  that  Ishmael's  ghost,  yet  conscious  of  its  former 
patriarchal  dignity,  would  deem  it  flattery,  to  see  this 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  1 

item  of  its  base  biography?  But  this  is  supernatu- 
ralism;  and  therefore  spiritually  true,  though  literally 
as  false  as  Satan's  war  in  Heaven. 

In  the  last  verse  of  the  present  chapter,  we  read, 
"And  Abraham  sojourned  in  the  Philistine's  lai.d  ma- 
ny days." 

An  attempt  to  reconcile  this  with  its  context  would  be 
met  with  no  little  difficulty.  For  we  find  the  places  of 
Abraham's  residence,  after  his  return  from  Egypt  to 
Canaan,  to  have  been  first,  the  plain  of  Marnre,  near 
Hebron,  where  he  remained  until  the  destruction  of 
the  cities  of  the  plain;  when  he  is  said  to  have  jour- 
neyed from  thence  toward  the  south  country,  and  so- 
journed in  Gerar;  and  thence  to  Beer-sheba,  or  the 
place  of  profanity  between  Abimelech  and  himself, 
and  where  he  appears  to  have  been  at  the  close  of  this 
chapter.  And  the  following  considerations  are  found 
to  embarrass  the  consistency  of  the  text,  viz:  All  the 
forementioned  places  are  noted  in  biblical  maps,*and 
asserted  by  Josephus,  to  have  been  within  the  limits, 
and  constituting  a  part,  of  the  country  called  Canaan, 
or  Palestine.  Therefore  it  entirely  fails  of  being 
historically  true,  that  Abraham  ever  resided  in  the 
land  of  the  Philistines  at  all.  Beside,  Gerar  and 
Mamre  appear  to  have  been  convertible  terms;  hence 
we  find  the  location  spoken  of  as  Gerar,  or  Mamre. 
Hence  Abraham's  journey  from  the  one  place,  to  tli« 
other,  must  have  been  an  extremely  short  one ! 

Omitting  to  notice  the  several- particulars  of  the 
senseless  fable,  contained  in  the  22d  chapter,  it  should 
be  deemed  sufficient  to  remark  of  God's  project  to 


172  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

tempt  Abraham,  or,  as  more  appropriate,  to  test  the 
measure  of  his  faith,  that,  were  man  the  arbiter, 
some  such  trial  might  be  plausibly  prosecuted,  in  or- 
der to  develope  satisfactory  confidence  of  the  fact. 
But  how  contemptibly  absurd,  when  Omniscience 
judges  in  his  stead;  which  needs  no  testimony  to  a 
fact,  that  must  have  been  an  item  of  the  aggregate  of 
infinite  contemplation.  {^And  yet,  this  question  being 
of  a  Jewish  god,  I  quit  the  point,  in  utter  hopeless- 
ness of  success.  > 

t  Again,  Gen.  24,  29.  "  And  Rebekah  had  a  brother, 
and  his  name  was  Laban;"  and  at  29,  5,  cc  And  he 
(Jacob)  said  unto  them,  (the  three  flocks  of  sheep  of 
course,  since  no  persons  are  said  to  have  been  there) 
Know  ye  Laban,  the  son  of  Nahor?" 

At  24,  47,  we  find  the  following:  "And  I  (Isaac) 
asked  her  (Rebekah)  and  said,  Whose  daughter  art 
thou?  And  she  said,  the  daughter  of  Bethuel,  Na- 
hor's  son,  whom  Milcah  bear  unto  him."  Again,  at 
29,  1ft,  "  And  Jacob  told  Rachel  that  he  was  her  fath- 
er's brother,  and  that  he  was  Rebekah's  son."  The 
plain  state  of  all  which  is,  that  Abram,  or  Abraham, 
and  Nahor  were  brothers,  and  married  their  nieces, 
the  daughters  of  Haran.  That  Isaac,  the  son  of 
Abraham,  married  Rebekah,  the  daughter  of  Bethuel, 
and  grand  daughter  of  Nahor.  Pursuing  therefore 
the  foregoing  relationship,  in  the  next  or  second  de- 
gree. And  that  finally  Jacob,  the  grand  son  of  Abra- 
ham, married  Leah  and  Rachel,  the  daaghters  of  La- 
ban,  or  grand  daughters  of  Bethuel,  and  great-grand 
•laughters  of  Nahor,  the  same  relation  being  here  pre- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  173 

served  in  the  next  degree.  And  here  we  leave  this 
subject  to  be  reconciled,  in  its  several  parts,  by  whom- 
soever, that  can  command  the  leisure  and  ability. 

Our  opportunity  not  permitting  us  to  dwell  upon 
secondary  topics,  we  are  constrained  to  pass  innu- 
merable absurdities  without  remark;  such  as  Jacob's 
curious  device,  to  defraud  his  father-in-law  out  of  the 
produce  of  his  cattle;  Rachel's  theft  of  her  father's 
household  gods;  Jacob's  meeting  God's  angelic  host 
at  Mahanaim,  or  place  of  angels,  near  the  middle  of 
Palestine,  whence  he  "sent  messengers  before  him  to 
Esau,  his  brother  into  the  land  of  Seir,  the  country 
of  Edom^  &c.  &c.  And  wherefore  he  shall  have 
sent  messengers  the  distance  of  a  hundred  and  forty 
miles,  and  into  a  government  entirely  beyond  fiis  con-r 
templated  residence,  simply  to  report  his  childish 
fearfulness  of  his  brother,  Esau,  whom  he  had  al- 
ready succeeded  in  defrauding  of  his  birthright  and 
his  father's  blessing,  seems  to  have  been  left  to  the 
discovery  of  second-sight. 

"  And  Jacob  was  left  alone;  and  there  wrestled  a 
man  with  him,  until  the  breaking  of  the  day.  And 
when  he  saw  that  he  prevailed  not  against  him,  he 
touched  the  hollow  of  his  thigh:  and  the  hollow  of 
Jacob's  thigh  was  out  of  joint,  as  he  wrestled  with 
him.  And  he  (the  man)  said,  Let  me  go,  for  the  day 
breaketh:  And  he  (Jacob)  said,  I  will  not  let  thee  go, 
except  thou  bless  me,"  which,  it  seems  he  did;  and 
therefore  "  Jacob  called  the  name  of  the  place  Peniel: 
for  I  have  seen  God  face  to  face,  and  my  life  is  pro- 
served."  Nqw,  do  you  think  that  this  adventure  be- 


174  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

twecn  Jacob  and  God  Almighty,  in  the  form  and  phys- 
;-  i^al  character  of  humanity,  actually,  or  literally  o.c- 
\  curred: 

Doe?  it  not  seem  most  strange,  nor  less  contempti- 
ble, that  such  puerile  notions  of  a  Deity  shall  ever 
have  prevailed  among  mankind,  as  that  he  banters, 
speculates  and  wrestles  with  his  creatures,  as  man 
with  man,  or  rather  clown  with  clown?  And  these 
are  beauties  that  religious  Faith  would  wed  and  hug, 
as  though  they  were  the  very  life  of  paradise  it  hopes 
for. 

And  is  it  probable,  seeing  there  was  no  miracle  in 
the  case,  that  Jacob  pursued  his  journey,  so  immedi- 
ately and  well,  with  an  unreduced  luxation  of  his 
thigh,  by  which  it  seems,£however,  God  made  him 
permanently  a  cripple^  And  was  it  really  generous 
in  God,  to  leave  his  friend  in  such  predicament? 

The  story  of  Dinah's  ravishment  is  too  absurd  to 
pass  unnoticed;  and  yet  we  cannot  stop  to  pay  it  half 
the  compliment  it  deserves. 

Chronologically,  Leah  was  given  to  Jacob  in  the 
year  1753  before  Christ;  and  Dinah's  ravishment  per- 
petrated in  1732,  B.  C.  If,  therefore,  Reuben,  Leah's 
eldest  son,  was  born  one  year  after  the  former  date, 
he  will  have  been  nineteen  years  old,  at  the  time  of 
his  sister's  insult. 

And  if  we  take  the  case  of  Isaac,  as  a  precedent  of 
the  age,  at  which  infants  were,  at  that  time  weaned, 
we  shall  have  Simeon  to  be  near  five  years  younger, 
or  fifteen,  at  the  uttermost,  at  the  period  above  allu- 
ded to:  and,  by  the  same  rule,  Levi,  Leah's  third 


THEOLOGICAL  CRITICISMS.  175 

son>  would  have  been  but  ten  years  old.  And  yet,  we 
are  bound  to  believe,  (the  story  of  Ishmael  to  the  con- 
trary notwithstanding,)  that  these  two  infants,  "  Sim- 
eon and  Levi,  Dinah's  brethren,  took  each  man  his 
sword,  and  came  upon  the  city  boldly,  and  slew  all  the 
males.  And  they  slew  Hamor,  and  Shechem  his  son, 
with  the  edge  of  the  sword,  and  took  Dinah  out  of 
Shechem's  house,  and  went  out."  But  the  gist  of 
this  affair  is  not  yet  exposed.  For,  by  the  rule  adopt- 
ed for  the  interval  between  the  births  of  children, 
Dinah  must  have  been  at  the  time  in  question  several 
years  unborn;  And,  at  the  most  accommodating  calcu- 
lation, she  could  not  have  exceeded  four  years.  Rath- 
er young  to  have  been  the  subject  of  that  species  of 
abuse!  Nor  ought  we  to  ornit  the  expression  of  our 
deepest  cantempt  for  the  fraud,  these  children  of  God 
practiced  upon  the  credulous  House  of  Hamor. 

Passing  over  the  story  of  Joseph  and  its  connections^ 
with  the  frank  avowal,  that,  with  all  its  faults,  (and 
they  are  as  numerous  as  even  Scepticism  could  wish,) 
it  is,  nevertheless,  particularly  creditable,  amongst  its 
baser  relatives,  we  will  sit  down,  deliberately,  to  the 
task  of  criticising  the  wonderful  story  of  the  Hebrew 
Exodus. 

And  firstj  of  the  course  of  miracles  instituted  by 
God,  in  order  to  induce  Pharaoh  to  release  the  He- 
brews from  bondage.  We  find  at  Ex.  1,  22,  a  decree 
of  Pharaoh,  "  That  every  son  that  is  born,  ye  shall 
cast  into  the  river,"  and  that  Moses  was  preserved  by 
a  breach  of  it,  while  Aaron  being  born  four  years  ear- 
lier, escaped  its  application.  Several  entire  chapters 


17G  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

of  this  book  are  appropriated  to  an  account  of  mira- 
cles— wrought  by  God  and  the  Egyptian  sorcerers — a 
contest  most  obstinately  and  successfully  prosecuted, 
for  one,  wherein  the  parties  were  so  amazingly  une- 
qual. We  find,  for  several  trials,  that  God's  advan- 
tage was  unessential;  until,  at  length,  he  came  to  the 
finer  work  of  making  lice,  to  which  it  seems  the  gross 
machinery  of  the1  sorcerers  was  not  adapted. 

And  yet  we  think  it  strange,  that  those  magicians 
should  have  failed,  at  all,  even  against  the  Deity,  with 
the  power  they  are  admitted  to  have  had:  For  it 
seems  that  nothing  less  than  Omnipotence  could  make 
a  frog.  In  this  case,  therefore,  the  admission  is  too 
little  or  too  much — since  he  who  could  really  produce 
a  frog,  could  scarcely  fail  to  make  whatever  else  he 
might  intend.  And  then  this  whole  parade  must  have 
been  no  better  than  a  farce,  or  fiction,  whilst,  if  mira- 
cles were  possible,  a  single  one,  and  less  than  these, 
had  it  been  wrought  on  Pharaoh's  obstinacy,  to  soften, 
not  to  harden,  might  have  superseded  all  this  cata- 
logue; and  answered  quite  as  well,  except  the  nice 
excuse  God  found  in  Pharaoh's  obstinacy,  for  damn- 
ing him  most  heartily. 

Another  striking  inconsistency,  in  this  old,  witless^ 
tale,  appears  in  this.  Notwithstanding  God  had,  al- 
ready, turned  all  the  waters  of  Egypt,  to  blood,  so 
that  "the  fish  died,  and  all  the  river  stank,"  yet  it  is 
said  the  magicians  did  the  same  with  their  enchant- 
ments. And  we  ask  what  waters,  not  already  changed 
to  blood,  they  could  have  found,  on  which  to  operate? 
And  again,  while  Egypt  was  so  immersed  in  frogs,  as 


THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS.  177 

that  they  croaked  and  skipped  from  kneading-trough 
to  oven,  how  was  it  accurately  determined  that  the 
magicians  had  also  made  their  share?  And  then 
again,  the  strangest  oversight  is  here.  The  hail,  most 
wonderfully  thick  and  large,  destroys  both  man  and 
beast  unsheltered,  and  also,  all  of  living  vegetation, 
except  in  Goshen,  where  the  Hebrews  were :  And  yet 
the  locusts  came;  nor  were  restrained  from  eating  up 
the  last  and  least  green  vestige  that  remained,  through- 
out the  whole  of  Egypt. 

Another  oversight  appears  in  this.  That  God,  hav- 
ing sent  a  murrain,  of  which  all  the  cattle  of  Egypt 
died,  he  then  sent,  thoughtlessly,  a  storm  of  hail  to 
do  the  work  already  done.  And  still,  as  though  he 
were  forgetful,  or  insane,  he  swears  to  srnite  the  first 
born  of  the  whole,  upon  the  evening  of  his  memora- 
ble passover. 

But  what  insufferable  slander  should  we  deem  the 
following,  were  it  of  any  other,  than  a  Hebrew  god! 
Ex.  12,  13.  "And  the  blood  (upon  the  door-posts) 
shall  be  to  you  for  a  token  upon  the  houses  where 
you  (the  Hebrews)  are;  and  when  I  see  the  blood,  I 
will  pass  over  you,  and  the  plague  shall  not  be  upon 
you,  to  destroy  you,  when  I  smite  the  land  of  Egypt." 
What  could  be  said,  in  deeper  derogation  of  God's 
omnisciency,  than  that  he  should  need  such  bloody 
signal,  to  save  him  from  mistake?  And  what  worse 
slander  of  his  justice,  than  to  charge  him,  as  in  11,  2, 
of  having  said  to  Moses,  "  Speak  now  in  the  ears  of 
the  people,  and  let  every  man  borrow  of  his  neigh- 
bor, and  every  woman  of  her  neighbor,  jewels  of  sil- 

22 


173  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

ver  and  jewels  of  gold;'3  except  that  he  shall  have 
been  accused,  as  in  verse  3d,  of  directly  participating 
of  the  fraud,  by  "giving  the  people  (Hebrews)  favor 
in  the  sight  of  the  Egyptians?"  Or,  as  in  12.  36,  that 
he  shall  have  given  "the  people  favor  in  the  sight  of 
the  Egyptians,  so  thai  they  lent  unto  them  such  things 
as  they  required:  and  they  spoiled  the  Egyptians." 
fit  was  entirely  unnecessary  that  the  writer  of  the 
pentateuch  should  have  revealed  the  aforesaid  slan- 
ders of  his  god,  since  fraud  and  inconsistency  are  con- 
sonant with  his  general  character;  and  that,  beside, 
the  Egyptians  would  never  have  been  thus  defrauded 
by  their  slaves,  had  not  their  stupor  been  miraculous.^ 

^nd  again,  verse  37,  "And  the  children  of  Israel 
journeyed  from  Rameses  to  Succoth,  about  six  hun- 
dred thousand  on  foot,  that  were  men,  beside  children." 

Upon  this  extraordinary  item  of  Jewish  history, 
our  first  object  is,  to  establish,  by  a  careful  compari- 
son of  testimony,  and  an  unprejudiced,  and  even  lib- 
eral computation,  the  most  probable  number  of  per- 
sons- and  animals,  included  in  this  memorable  exodus. 

First  then,  we  find  several  biblical  declaration?, 
more  or  less  explicit  upon  the  point  in  question;  our 
text  being  first  in  order.  And  next  in  order  is  Ex.  1,  46, 
"  Even  all  they  that  were  numbered  (of  an  age  fit  for 
war)  were  six  hundred  and  three  thousand  five  hundred 
and  fifty."  And  also  as  enumerated  by  tribes,  2,  32, 
"These  are  those  which  were  numbered  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel,  by  the  house  of  their  fathers:  all  those 
that  were  numbered  of  the  camps,  throughout  their 
hosts,  were  six  hundred  thousand,  and  three  thou- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  17$ 

sand,  and  five  hundred  and  fifty.  But  the  Levites 
were  not  numbered  among  the  children  of  Israel;" 
they  not  being  included,  more  than  women,  in  the  list 
of  warriors.  And  in  corroboration  we  may  be  allowed 
to  introduce  the  testimony  of  Josephus;  who  says: 
"  Now  the  entire  multiude  of  those  that  went  out,  in- 
cluding the  women  and  children,  was  not  easy  to  be 
numbered,  but  those  that  were  of  an  age  fit  for  war" 
(from  twenty  to  fifty)  "  were  six  hundred  thousand." 
If,  therefore,  we  adopt  the  number  explicitly  given  in 
the  Scriptures,  we  have  first,  of  the  class  of  warriors, 
603,550,  who  were  of  an  age  between  20  and  50  years. 
Nor  can  there  be  found  either  fact  or  reason,  against 
there  having  been  an  equal  number  of  coeval  females, 
or  603,550.  And  of  both  males  and  females,  above 
and  below  the  foregoing  numbers.,  (seeing  that  120 
years  were  established  as  the  period  of  human  life,) 
it  must  be  sufficiently  liberal  to  estimate  them  at  an 
equal  number,  or  1,207,100;  to  which  the  Levites  are 
yet  to  be  added.  To  this  point  we  find  at  Num.  8,  29, 
that,  cc  All  that  were  numbered  of  the  Levites,  which 
Moses  and  Aaron  numbered  at  the  command  of  the 
Lord,  throughout  their  families,  all  the  males  from  a 
month  old  and  upward,  were  twenty  and  two  thou- 
sand;" to  which  should,  most  reasonably,  be  added  as 
many  females,  making  an  aggregate  of  44,000.  Which 
several  numbers,  being  added  together,  amount  to 
2,458,200  as  the  least  probable  aggregate  of  persons, 
concerned  in  this  event;  not  including  the  indefinite 
"mixed  multitude,  that  went  up  also  with  them." 
And  of  the  flocks  and  herrh  tfrev  are  •  :- 


180  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

driven  forth,  it  would  be  erroneous  to  say,  as  in  Ex. 
If,  38,  that  "there  went  up  with  them  even  very 
much  cattle,"  unless  each  family  possessed  a  number 
of  animals  of  all  sorts,  double  that  of  its  human  indi- 
viduals. And  even  this  with  them,  both  for  food  and 
sacrifice,  and  also,  stocking  Canaan  in  the  end,  would 
be  a  state  of  poverty  indeed.  It  is,  therefore,  more 
than  generous,  to  compute  their  number  thus;  or  at 
4,912,200,  which,  added  to  the  aggregate  of  persons, 
is,  7,374,300  individuals,  of  both  men  and  beasts,  go- 
ing out  together,  from  the  land  of  Egypt.  And  here, 
we  are  met  by  a  difficulty,  not  very  easily  surmount- 
ed, viz.,  the  surprising  expedition  with  which  they 
marched  from  Rameses  to  the  Red  Sea,  i.  e.  a  dis- 
tance, by  the  biblical  map,  of  about  one  hundred  and 
twenty  miles  in  three  days,  and  that  too,  through  a 
district,  of  which  Josephus  says,  "And,  indeed,  that 
land  was  difficult  to  be  traveled  over,  not  only  by  ar- 
mies, but  by  single  persons." 

Now,  we  find  no  intimation,  that  th.e  manner,  or  ra- 
pidity of  the  Hebrew's  march,  .wrnre  miraculously  as- 
sisted, whatever  other  circumstances  may  have  been 
thus  modified.  These,  therefore,  are  subjects  of  law- 
ful criticism;  which  may  be  handled  alike,  without 
mittens,  and  without  the  guiliof  blasphemy,  however 
justly  chargeable  with  heresy. 

To  the  validity  of  the  record,  that  these  7,374,300 
individuals  actually  commenced  their  march  from 
Rameses,  on  the  morning  after  the  passover,  and. 
more  especially,  harnessed,  or  by  fives,  and  at  eve- 
ning encamped  at  Succotb,  a  distance  of  about  forty 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  181 

miles,  there  is  at  least  one  very  obstinate  objection, 
viz:  That,  in  that  form  of  march,  admitting,  them  all 
to  be  well  disciplined  soldiers,  and  proceeding  in  line, 
allowing  two  feet  for  each  platoon,  they  would  have 
extended,  from  front  to  rear,  but  little  less  than  nine 
hundred  miles. 

And,  admitting  the  eligibility  of  the  country,  and 
that  they  really  marched  in  platoons  of  forty  individ- 
uals abreast,  they  would  still  have  occupied  a  dis- 
tance of  one  hundred  and  eleven  miles;  at  which  es- 
timate (whereby  we  yield  eight  hundred  per  cent  of 
our  rightful  advantage)  the  case  would,  then,  stand 
thus.  The  first  platoon  having  commenced  its  march, 
at  Rameses,  and  proceeded  at  the  quickest  rate  of 
military  progression,  would  have  required  twenty 
hours  of  incessant  marching,  to  reach  its  destined 
Succoth.  And  yet,  being  followed  by  the  rest,  in  the 
manner  indicated,  but  little  more  than  a  third  of  this 
living  immensity  will  have  started.  And  ere  the  last 
platoon  can  have  removed  a  step  from  Rameses,  the 
first  must  have  been  nearly  at  the  sea,  and  have  been 
marching  at  the  very  swiftest  rate,  and  unremittingly, 
but  little  less  than  five  whole  days,  or  from  sunrise  un- 
til sunset  each.  Hence,  the  rear  platoon  would  not 
have  reached  the  sea,  until  near  the  close  of  the  tenth 
day. 

It  is,  therefore,  apparently  impossible,  to  reconcile 
the  story,  with  the  circumstances  it  inevitably  involves. 

Another  objection  here,  importunately  obtrudes. 
Did  Pharaoh  repeal  the  prudent  ordinance,  from 
which  Moses,  in  his  infancy,  so  marvelously  escaped  ? 


\ 

18-2  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

If  so,  why  has  Inspiration  neglected  to  reveal  it,  and 
hence  afford  another  hook  for  Scepticism  to  hang  up- 
on? And  if  not,  the  conclusion  is  resistless,  that  Mo- 
ses was  the  youngest  Hebrew  living  (some  rare  eva- 
sions of  the  law  excepted)  at  the  time  of  this  strange 
exodus. 

And  still  another,  somewhat  unyielding  difficulty 
comes  up,  from  out  this  fertile  mass  of  tradionary 
rottenness. 

We  find  the  Hebrews  to  have  numbered  two  mill- 
ions, four  hundred  fifty-eight  thousand  and  two  hun- 
dred. And  that  this  immense  population  shall  have 
proceeded  from  the  seventy  Israelites  of  Jacob's  tribe, 
is  what  we  should  sooner  chaw  upon,  than  undertake 
to  swallow  whole. 

Allowing  these  seventy  persons  to  have  doubled 
each  twenty  years,  during  the  period  of  their  residence 
in  Egypt— which  is  not  only  a  more  rapid  increase, 
than  a  state  of  cruel  slavery,  would  justify,  but  than 
any  other  history  has  ever  recorded,  the  whole  num- 
ber at  the  time  of  their  exodus  would  have  been  fifty- 
five  thousand  six  hundred  and  eighty.  Or  a  little 
more  than  one  eleventh  of  the  Hebrew  warriors. 

And  still,  to  doubt  that  this  is  veritably  God's  reve- 
lation of  a  literal  occurrence,  is  deemed  unpardonable 
heresy,  for  which  its  subject  should  be  physically 
kicked,  and  spiritually  damned.— At  least,  so  seems 
good  orthodoxy  to  consider  it;  and  wonders  that  God 
should  be  so  dilatory,  in  his  almighty  retribution. 

And  here,  at  the  threshold  of  our  inquiry  into  the 
absurdities  of  Judaism,  our  already  expended  oppor- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


1SS 


tunity  admonishes  me  that  a  close  of  this  discourse  is 
indispensable.  Anil  hence  the  residue  of  this  He- 
brew miscellany,  compiled  of  fabulous  traditions, 
senseless  theology,  exagerated,  partial  civil-history, 
moral  allegories,  tracts  and  dogmas,  with  much  sub- 
lime and  graphic  poetry,  must  pass  untouched,  and 
scarcely  pointed  at. 

However  discourteous,  or  even  diabolical,  it  may 
be  deemed  by  Christien  Superstitionists,  I  am,  never- 
theless, constrained,  in  obedience  to  'my  deep  contempt 
of  its  recorded,  superstitious  fatuities,  to  pass  over 
the  entire  book  of  Leviticus,  with  this  single  critical 
remark,  viz:  That  Reason  may  fret  herself  to  mad- 
ness, before  she  finds  a  mode  of  reconciling  its  for- 
malities with  any  higher  views  of  God  or  Nature, 
than  those,  a  savage  Superstition  would  engender: 
And,  as  contrasted  with 'Gospel  principles,  must  have 
been  the  senseless  institutions  of  a  different  God;  or 
else  a  stranger  thing  must  be  admitted,  than  that  of 
seperate  Gods,  for  Jew  and  Christian;  I  mean,  the 
acquisition,  by  the  Jewish  one,  of  so  much  wisdom 
and  consistency,  as  would  constitute  respectable  hu- 
manity! 

Of  Deuteronomy  I  would  say  more,  and  less  con- 
temptuously, were  not  my  opportunity  expended.  But 
as  it  is,  I  may  venture  upon  a  single  question.  In 
contemplation  of  the  Jewish,  civil  code,  do  you  feel 
disposed  to  its  adoption,  as  a  substitute  for  that  you 
have;  or  its  author,  as  your  executive,  rather  than 
elect  one  from  among  yourselves?  Or  rather,  do 
you  not  most  heartily  contemn  that  antiquated,  blood- 
less mummy,  that  literary  death's  head,  that  Platonism 


134  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

has  lugged  along,  to  frighten   fools  and  children  with. 

Of  God's  extreme  civility  to  Joshua,  much  com- 
ment might  be  divertingly  expended,  were  ic  admissi- 
ble; nor  less  than  volumes  upon  the  book  containing 
his  biography.  But  we  can  only  stop  to  ask,  if  you 
believe  God  taught  such  bungling  astronomy,  as  this 
stupid  fable  indicates?  Or  that  he  was  so  lame  in  al- 
mighty calculation,  as  to  adopt  a  plan,  for  Joshua's 
benefit,  by  which  the  world  must  have  been  physical- 
ly deranged,  instead  of  a  dozen  others,  not  less  effi- 
cient, and  that  common-sense  would  sanction! 

Upon  the  farce,  (Judg.  6,  37)  between  God  and  Gid- 
eon, about  the  miraculous  bedewing  the  fleece  of 
wool,  I  would  not  even  waste  contempt. 

What  strange  unnatral  thing,  was  that  old  giant, 
Sampson,  whose  strength,  so  commonly  of  flesh  and 
bone,  resided  so  entirely  in  his  hair.  Nor  was  Deli- 
lah's method  to  effect  her  object,  less  odd  than  Samp- 
son's constitution! 

In  the  llth  chapter  of  Samuel,  we  find  the  history 
of  an  event,  although  not  reputedly  miraculous,  appa- 
rently, too  superhuman  to  have  been  otherwise  ac- 
complished. We  are  here  told,  that  messengers  were 
sent  from  Jabesh  Gilead  to  Gibeah,  soliciting  the  aid 
of  Saul.  To  whom  he  replied,  "To-morrow,  by  the 
time  the  sun  be  hot,  ye  shall  have  help."  And  so 
punctual  was  Joshua,  that  he  collected,  from  all  Israel 
and  Judah  330,000  warriors,  (in  no  time)  and  marched 
them  in  a  single  night,  a  distance,  by  any  practicable 
route,  of  at  least  60  miles,  and  fell  upon  the  enemy  at 
Jabeshj  before  sunrise,  the  next  morning.  And  thus 
stands  the  character  of  the  objects  of  religious  faith  t 


LECTURE  VI. 

OF  , THE     ORIGIN     AND     CHARACTER     OF    CHRISTIANITY 
AND    THE    GOSPEL. 

Suspect  not  your  humble  servant  of  standing  here, 
as  a  malicious  impugner  of  Christianity,  or  its  adopted 
oracle;  nor  charge  me  with  insincerity,  while  I,  em- 
phatically, avow  my  preference  for  the  Gospel,  wheth- 
er of  style  or  sentiment,  to  any  other  tract,  of  human, 
or  superhuman,  origin.  And  yet,  to  yield  entire  as- 
sent to  its  utter  infallibility,  is  not  consistent  with  my 
present  views.  Nor  is  it  dissonant  with  its  own  ex- 
plicit teaching,  that  we  should,  not  merely  adopt  opin- 
ions honestly,  but  that  we  should  carefully  test  them, 
by  the  exercise  of  reason. 

Not  having  a  moment's  opportunity  to  spare  upon  a 
preface,  we  may  claim  to  be  excused  that  want  of 
etiquette;  and,  therefore,  unreproached,  fall,  warmly 
and  abruputly,  at  our  work. 

Of  the  origin  of  Christianity,  we  are  too  poor  in 
historical  evidence,  to  forego  the  use  of  much  hypo- 
thesis; and  hence,  we  hope  for  pardon,  for  its  subse- 
quent adoption* x»i A  sdJ  «;o-fi  Imioc.iwi  bnn  , 

33 


186  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

That  Christianity  is  quite  as  old,  as  itself  has 
claimed,  (and  \ve  doubt  not  older  still)  should  he,  at 
once,  accorded  to  all  its  advocates,  who  hope  to  make 
it  their  advantage. 

Our  first  hypothesis  is  this.  That  Christianity, 
originated  in  Platonism,  or,  indeed,  is  but  that,  suc- 
cessively and  variously  modified. 

And,  in  support  of  this  opinion,  we  adduce  the  fol- 
lowing circumstances. 

Plato  is  universally  known,  where  learning  has  been 
taught,  as  the  Grecian  prophet,  or  man  of  God. — As 
having  amplified,  as  well  as  mystified,  the  theological 
crudities  of  his  teacher,  Socrates;  and  finally  wrought 
them  into  an  elaborate  system  of  incomprehensible 
Spiritualism,  which  we  assume  to  have  been  adopted 
bp  the  Jewish  sect  of  philosophers,  denominated  Es- 
scns,  of  which  Philo  appears  to  have  been  an  eminent 
disciple. 

Platonism  was  promulgated,  in  Greece,  a  little  less 
than  four  hundred  years  before  the  Christian  era,  and 
became  the  uncontested  criterion,  or  test,  of  all  exist- 
ing literature,  until  Aristotle's  almost  superhuman 
strength  pulled  the  academic  from  the  clouds,  and 
used  him  up  as  condiment  to  common  matter. 

That  Platonism,  introduced  thus  early  into  Greece, 
should  not  have  found  its  way  the  little  distance  from 
Athens  to  Judea,  some  time  before  the  Christian  era, 
is  too  unnatural  to  be  the  subject  of  a  doubt.  And 
lustory  explicitly  informs  us,  that  this  philosophy  was 
inculcated  in  Judea,  during  the  reign  of  the  Ptole- 
mies, and  imported  from  the  Alexandrian  school. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  187 

And  still  it  could  not  have  retained  its  name  of  Pla- 
tonism,  among  the  Jews,  or  .Toseplms  would,  most 
certainly,  have  noticed  it;  and  therefore  it  must  have 
had  some  other  epithet. 

It  cannot  well  be  doubted,  that  the  Jewish  sect, 
called  Essens,  from  its  character  and  habits,  was  iden- 
tical with  Platonism. 

And  yet,  its  origin  is,  historically,  a  mystery.  This 
sect  is  unquestionably  referred  to  in  the  apocrypha] 
writings  denominated  Maccabees,  more  than  160  years 
before  the  present  era.  And  Josephus,  who  makes 
no  reference  to  its  origin,  says  it  had  existed  for  a  long 
time,  previous  to  the  date  of  his  writing. 

We  are  also  informed,  that  Philo,  the  learned  Jew, 
was  a  most,  devout  disciple  of  new,  or  modified,  Pla- 
tonism, or  Eclecticism,  which,  in  their  time,  appear  to 
have  he  en  convertible  terms,  and  that  he  was,  as  be- 
fore remarked,  a  member  of  the  sect  of  Essens  also. 

Having  thus  assumed  what  it  is  impossible,  at  this 
long  after  time,  to  prove,  that  Platonism  was  called 
Essenism  in  Judea,  we  will  now  proceed  to  test  its 
claims  as  mother  of  Christianity. 

Josephus  informs  us  that  the  sect  of  Essens  existed 
in  his  own  time;  and  gives  the  following  account  of 
their  religious  principles  and  conduct. 

They  hold  that  all  things  are  best  ascribed  to  God. 
That  man  consists  of  body  and  soul,  the  first  corrupti- 
ble, the  last  immortal;  and  that  the  rewards  of  right- 
eousness are  to  be  earnestly  striven  for.  That,  though 
they  send  presents  to  the  temple,  they  offer  up  no  sa- 
crificesj  but  have  more  pure  lustrations  of  their  own; 


188  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

(or  sacrifices  of  the  heart)  on  which  account  they  are 
prohibited  the  temple,  and  therefore  sacrifice,  or  wor- 
ship, by  themselves. 

They  also  live  a  better  life  than  other  men,  and  ad- 
dict themselves  entirely  to  husbandry.  They  excel,  to 
admiration,  all  other  men  in  virtue;  theirs  not  being 
common  virtue,  but  real  righteousness,  and  such  as 
never  hath  appeared  among  others,  either  barbarian 
or  Greek,  not  even  for  a  little  time,  and  yet  it  hath 
long  endured  among  them.  They  have  all  things  in 
common;  and  stewards  are  appointed  to  distribute 
equally  to  all,  according  to  their  necessities. 

They  reject  pleasure,  as  an  evil,  but  esteem    conti- 
nence and  conquest   of  the  passions  as  virtue.  1  They 
choose   not   to   marry,   and  only  consent  to  it,  on  the 
principle   of  necessity,  in   perpetuating   the   species. 
They  guard   against  the   laciviousriess  of  women,  of 
whose  fidelity    they    are   suspicious.^.  They   despise 
riches,  and  are  communicative  to  admiration.     They 
have  no  one  certain  city,  but  many  of  them  dwell  in 
every  city,   and    wherever   they  are,  they  partake  of 
whatever  they  need,  as  though  it  were  their  own;  and 
therefore  carry  nothing  with   them,   when  they  travel 
into  remote  parts;  though  still  they  take  their  weapons 
with  them,  for  fear  of  thieves.     They  neither  discard 
nor  change  their  clothes  or  shoes,  until   they   are  en- 
tirely worn  out,  or  torn,  to  pieces."^  They  neither  buy 
nor  sell  between  each  other,  but  make  such  exchanges, 
as  will  best   accommodate;    and    are    allowed   to  take 
from  each  other,  whatever  they  may  need,   as  though 
it  were    their   own.      Their  extraordinary  piety  con- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS'.  189 

strains  them  to  keep  a  strict  silence  about  profane 
matters,  until  sunrise,  employing  their  time,  mean- 
while, in  prayers  and  supplications,  when  they  go,  in- 
dustriously and  faithfully  to  their  several  employ- 
ments. They  are  toad  of  clothing  themselves  in 
white  veils;  and  punctilious  in  the  practice  of  bathing 
their  bodies  in  cold  water.  They  are  particular  to 
have  grace  said  before  and  after  meals,  praising  their 
God  as  the  author  of  the  benefaction.  They  permit 
no  clamor,  nor  disturbance,  to  pollute  their  houses, 
but  permit  every  one  to  speak  in  his  turn.  They  are 
eminent  for  sobriety  and  fidelity,  and  are  ministers  of 
peace.  They  dispense  their  anger  with  perfect  just- 
ice, and  restrain  their  passions  within  proper  bounds. 
They  condemn  swearing  as  being  worse  than  perjury, 
and  hold  their  mere  word  more  binding  than  an  oath. 
They  study  attentively,  the  writings  of  the  ancients, 
and  choose  from  them,  whatever  they  deem  most  ad- 
vantageous to  their  souls  and  bodies.  They  do  not 
admit  their  proselytes  to  full  membership,  at  once; 
but  adopt  them  on  trial  for  a  year,  presenting  them,  at 
the  same  time,  a  hatchet,  a  girdle,  and  a  white  gar- 
ment: And  if  they  succeed  in  their  observances,  to 
the  satisfaction  of  the  sect,  they  then  participate  of 
the  waters  of  purification.  They  are  so  strict  obser- 
vers of  the  seventh  day,  as  a  day  of  rest,  that  they 
not  only  refrain  from  their  ordinary  labors,  but  pre- 
pare their  food  beforehand,  that  they  may  avoid  even 
the  kindling  a  fire.  They  believe,  like  the  Greeks,  in 
a  future  spiritual  retribution — that  the  souls  of  the 
just  retire  to  a  state  of  extatic  happiness,  while  those 
of  the  wicked  are  subjects  of  an  endless  torment. 


190  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

We  find,  at  the  commencement  of  the  present  era, 
that  there  were  three  prominent  philosophic  sects,  as 
they  were  called,  among  the  Jews;  but  which,  with 
us,  would  be  denominated  religious  sects.  These 
were  the  Pharisees,  or  disciples  of  Reason,  despisers 
of  luxury  and  ostentation;  respecters  of  age.  believers 
in  spiritual  immortality,  and  future  reward  and  pun- 
ishment, according  to  the  virtuous  or  vicious  charac- 
ter of  the  recipient.  They  believed  that  all  things  were 
governed  by  fate,  except  the  actions  and  thoughts  of 
mankind,  which  they  considered  free. 

The  second  sect  was  the  Saducees,  or  aristocrisy; 
disbelievers  in  immortality,  and  strict  observers  of 
the  Mosaic  law. 

Of  the  third  sect,  or  Essens,,  we  have  already  spo- 
ken. 

Now,  of  these  three  sects,  we  may  very  reasonably 
conclude,  judging  by  the  manner  in  which  Josephus 
treats  them,  that  the  Essen,  was  a  very  numerous  and 
popular  sect,  as  late  as  seventy  years  after  the  reputed 
birth  of  Christ,  or  near  forty  years  after  his  crucifix- 
ion. And,  therefore,  were  not  this  the  sect,  known, 
subsequently  as  Christian,  a  most  singular  phenome- 
non is  thus  developed  in  the  fact,  that  there  is  not  a 
single  reference,  within  the  pages  of  the  Testament, 
to  such  a  sect,  nor  even  to  such  a  name. 

On  what  principle,  therefore,  except  the  one  sug- 
gested, can  this  anomaly  be  accounted  for?  By  what 
strange,  yet  secret,  providence  or  catastrophe,  did 
such  a  numerous  and  interesting  sect  become,  so  sud- 
denly, extinguished  ?  Indeed,  we  find  the  eulogy  of 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  191 

Josephus  to  have  been  written   near  forty   years  after 
Christ's  reputed  mission;  and  still  this  sect  existed. 

And  whoever  shall  carefully  compare  Josephus'  ac- 
count of  it,  with  the  apostolic  Acts,  and  yet  is  uncon- 
vinced that  Christians  and  Essens  were  identical, 
must,  we  think,  be  blinded  by  his  prejudices.  There 
seems,  in  truth,  no  chance  for  reasonable  dissent. 

But,  not  having  time,  at  present,  to  note  the  partic- 
ulars of  their  agreement,  I  must,  therefore,  leave  you 
to  make  the  examination  for  yourselves,  with  this  ad- 
ditional suggestion. — That,  in  forming  your  conclu- 
sion, you  will  make  all  proper  allowance  for  want  of 
uniformity,  that  an  admission  of  successive  modifica- 
tion would  demand. 

On  account  of  the  barrenness  of  our  subject,  in  the 
article  of  positive  testimony,  upon  the  question  of  the 
origin  of  Christianity,  we  are  thrown  -upon  the  em- 
barrassing resource,  of  relying  upon  negative  circum-  - 
stances,  as  evidence  in  our  own  behalf.  And,  to  this 
point,  but  a  few  moments  can  be  appropriated. 

First  then,  of  Philo,  the  Jew,  who  was  born  seve- 
ral years  before  the  Christian  era. 

Whilst  he  talked  familiarly  of  the  Logos,  or  wis- 
dom of  God,  as  having  planned  the  universe,  and  su- 
perintended its  phenomena;  and  as  being  adequate 
and  available  to  man's  extremes!  temporal  and  spirit- 
ual good,  we  still  hear  nothing  of  this  miraculous  re- 
former, denominated  Christ,  or  God  incarnate.  Nor 
yet  a  hint  of  Christian  reformation,  nor  its  wonderful, 
or  miraculous  associates.  And  that  no  opportunity 
for  information,  could  have  been  more  favorable  than 


192  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

his.  is  evinced,  most  clearly,  from  the  several  circum- 
stances of  character,  situation  and  cotemporality.  The 
latter  circumstance  being  fully  established,  by  the  his- 
torical fact,  that  in  A.  D.  42,  or  eight  years  after  the 
reputed  crucifixion,  he  was  selected  by  his  country- 
men, as  embassador  to  Rome,  being  esteemed  the 
most  learned  and  eloquent  of  his  nation. 

Vow,  do  you  think  it,  at  all,  reasonable,  that  the 
most  literary  and  popular  scholar  in  Judea,  and  living 
cotemporaneously  with  so  extraordinary  a  personage, 
as  Christ  is  represented  to  have  been,  and  necessarily, 
from  his  situation,  an  attendant  spectator  of  more  or 
less  of  the  extraordinary  phenomena,  said  to  have  ac- 
companied his  supernatural  mission,  and  what  is 
more,  a  brother  Jew,  by  birth  and  parentage,  would 
have  observed,  in  all  his  writings,  so  profound  a  si- 
lence, as  he  appears  to  have  done? 

If  so,  it  can  scarcely  be  disputed,  that  your  preju- 
dice has  stupified  your  reason. 

Plutarch  comes  next,  to  tell  the  world  of  his  re- 
proachful ignorance,  or  willful,  base  suppression  of 
the  truth:  For,  in  his  ample,  labored  writings, neither 
the  name  of  Christ,  nor  Christian  can  be  found.  And 
yet  this  greatest  Grecian  scholar  of  his  time,  was 
born  but  fifty  years,  after  Christ,  or  but  seventeen  after 
his  notorious  miracles  and  crucifixion.  Norcouldhe, 
well,  have  evaded  knowing  quite  as  much  of  these 
events,  under  circumstances  no  less  favorable,  as  did 
the  Roman  Pliny,  who,  doubtless,  has  been  made  to 
say.  while  dead,  what  he  never  even  dreamed  of  while 
alive. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  ,          193 

We  next,  presume  upon  the  testimony  of  Josephus^ 
the  eminent  Jewish  historian,  whose  ghost  is  doubt- 
less yet  reproaching,  with  its  shadowy  scowls,  that  of 
every  hooded  Romanist,  that  lands  on  yonder  side  the 
river  Styx,  for  having  made  his  book  tell  lies,  of  which 
his  living  self  would  have  been  most  heartily  ashamed. 

This  most  eminent  scholar  of  his  time,  whether  of 
Judea,  Greece  or  Rome,  we  find  was  born  A.  D* 
37,  or  four  years  after  the  Logos  had  closed  its  per- 
sonal, earthly,  mission:  And  yet,  with  all  this,  best 
possible,  opportunity  for  knowledge,  of  all  his  learned 
countrymen,  (Philo,  or  Paul,  alone,  excepted,)  he 
has  observed  the  strictest  silence,  unless  the  best,  and 
most,  of  modern  scholars  are  entirely  mistaken,  upon 
the  question  of  a  supposed  interpolation  in  this 
thor's  book. 

That  the  single  sentence,  of  all  the  work,  appro- 
priated to  this  momentous  subject,  is  an  interpolation 
by  the  Romish  clergy,  who  propagated,  unblushingly . 
the  damnable,  but  church-saving  doctrine,  that  false- 
hood is  commendable,  whenever  it  contributes  to  the 
interest  of  religion,  is  a  plausible  conclusion,  at  least. 

In  corroboration  of  this  opinion,  we  have  that  of 
the  most  ingenious  Christian  philosopher  of  the  last 
century,  Father  James  Henry  Bernardino;  patronized 
by  Lous  16th,  knighted  by  Napoleon,  and  pensioned 
by  Joseph  Bonaparte:  And  of  whom  it  should  be  suf- 
ficient praise  (were  that  his  sole  production)  that  In 
wrote  the  matchless  tale,  Paul  and  Virginia. 

This  worthy,  and  hence  extraordinary  father  of  the 
Romish  Church,  remarks,  and  with  quite  his  usual 

84 


)     U^fVMI 

lis  au- 


1^  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

emphasis,  (Studies  of  Nature,    vol.  2,  p  166,)  having 
nlready,   severely,  animadverted  upon  the  dishonesty 
of  tho.se  early  Christian  writers,  through  whose  hands 
the  ancient   manuscripts  had  passed :  "  It  is  impossi- 
ble  to  adduce  a  more   satisfactory   demonstration   of 
this  ancient  infidelity  of  the  two  parties"    (meaning 
Christians  and  sceptics)  "  than  an  interpolation  to  be 
found  in  the  writings  of  Flavius  Josephus,   who  was 
cotemporary     with    Pliny."      (One    of   the   greatest 
scholars  in  Rome,  but  silent,   we    believe,    upon    the 
subject  in  question,)  "  He  is  made  to  say,  in  so  many 
words,    that   the  Messiah  was  just  born;  and  he  con- 
tinues  his   narration,   without    referring,  so  much  as 
once,  to  this  wonderful   event,  to  the  end  of  a  volu- 
minous history.     How  can  it  be   believed    that  Jose- 
phus,   who  frequently   indulges   himself  in  a  tedious 
detail  of  minute  circumstances,   relating  to  events  of 
little  importance,  should  not  have  reverted  a  thousand 
and  a  thousand  times,  to  a  birth  so  deeply  interesting 
to  his  nation,  considering  that  its  very  destiny  was  in- 
volved in  that  event;  and  that  even  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem    was  only  one  of  the  consequences  of  the 
death  of  Jesus  Christ?     He  on   the  contrary  perverts 
the  meaning  of  the  prophecies  which  announce  Him, 
applying   them    to    Vespasian  and  Titus;  for  he,   as 
well   as  the  other   Jews,  expected  a  Messiah  trium- 
phant.     Beside    had    Josephus  believed   in   Christ, 
would  he  not  have  embraced  his  religion  r" 

And  this  is  a  quotation  from  a  voluminous  work 
designed  especially  to  sustain  the  divinity  of  the 
Scriptures. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  195 

Iti  simple  courtesy,  we  are  bound  to  own  that  the 
religious  sect,  called  Christians,  has,  undoubtedly, 
existed,  and  been  known  by  that  cognomen,  for  nearly 
eighteen  hundred  years,  at  least.  The  question, 
therefore,  next  occurring,  is.  \\rhen,  whence,  and 
wherefore  was  its  name  obtained. 

The  first  occurrence  of  the  name  of  Christian  is 
said  to  have  been  about  A.  D.  43,  or  10  years  from 
the  crucifixion;  as  found  in  Acts  11,  26,  which  says, 
"the  disciples  were  called  Christians  first  in  Antioch. 

This  text  clearly  evinces,  from  its  particular  con- 
struction, that  this  name  was  not  assumed,  but  arbi- 
trarily, and  may  be  tauntingly,  imposed  upon  the  sect, 
as  a  stigma,  intended  to  reproach  it  with,  like  Qua- 
ker, Methodist,  Holy  Roller,  &c.,  and  suggested  by 
some  objectionable  peculiarity  in  their  creed  or  con- 
duct. And,  if  the  Christian  sect  acquired  its  known 
cognomen  thus;  must  we  thence  conclude  it  had  no 
previous  epithet,  though  countless  thousands,  and  al- 
most daily  too,  are  said  to  have  been  proselyted  to 
this  new,  and  strange  philosophy — this  revision  of 
God's  first  attempt  at  creefl  or  statute  making,  for 
thirteen  years  preceding.  And  had  Christ  been 
known,  throughout  Judea,  as  its  human,  or  superhu- 
man author,  and  also  as  its  surprisingly,  if  not  mirac- 
ulously, successful  promulgator;  would  those  million 
proselytes  have  witlessly  relinquished  the  conscious 
credit  of  his  name,  and  stupidly  have  waited,  those 
ten  whole  years  from  his  departure,  in  order  that  Re- 
proach might  taunt  them  with  an  epithet? 

This  would  have  been  strange  indeed,  were  not  the 


196  THEOLOGICAL   CRITICISMS. 

whole  an  allegory:  But  then,  the  name  exists,  as  wo 
have  seen,  or  else  the  record  is  untrue,  since  Saul 
and  Barnabus  taught  Eclecticism,  alias,  Christianity, 
a  full  year  at  Antioch:  And  hence  our  next  enquiry — 
Whence  its  name?  Nor  can  we  here  proceed  a  step, 
without  hypothesis;  and,  however  weak  the  crutch 
on  which  we  limp,  'tis  our  dilemma,  to  hobble  thus, 
or  not  at  all. 

The  first  suggestion  of  our  friend  Hypothesis  is 
this. 

The  Gospel  is  an  allegory,  containing  the  very 
cream  of  all  the  known  philosophy,  at  its  date;  and 
doubtless  written  out  by  Philo,  the  Eclectic.  Nor 
could  Judea  have  found  another  Jew,  nor  the  world, 
perhaps,  another  man,  who  could  have  done  the  thing 
so  well!  But  that  he  could  do  it  thus,  we  have  no 
doubt,  if  Fame  has  not  most  falsely,  nor  less  flatter- 
ingly treated  him.  We  think  it  breathes  his  match- 
less style  and  spirit;  or  rather  glows  with  superhu- 
man pathos  and  benignity,  of  which  he,  much  more 
than  other  men,  was  master.  Nor  is  this  suggestion, 
apparautly  less  plausible,  than  that  which  makes  il- 
literate fishermen  its  author.  Had  such  obtained  the 
revelation;  they  would  scarcely  have  told  it  thus.  Nor 
has  superhuman  Inspiration  but  seldom  found  its  way 
from  God  to  man,  through  such  a  brilliant  medium. 
And  hence,  and  also  from  the  Logos  that  inspired  it, 
and  that  Philo  worshipped  as  the  Son,orsecoud  attri- 
bute of  God — as  He  of  the  trinity  personified,  who 
planned  the  world  and  still  remains  its  supervisor: 
and  who,  M  both  morally  preventive  and  recupera- 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  197 

live  salvation.  Nor  can  we  deem  it  less  than  strange, 
that  any  careful  reader  of  the  Gospel,  who  knows  a 
thought  of  Philo's  upon  the  point  in  question.  «houM 
possibly  evade  our  own  conclusion  ! 

And  would  you  have,  at  once,  a  lucid  specimen  oi' 
our  author's  style,  and  plain  acknowledgment,  of  alle- 
gory; read,  carefully,  what  he  has  uttered  by  fictitious 
John  in  chapter  first,  of  that  sublime  compendium  of 
all  the  best  philosophy  of  man,  when  that  compendi- 
um was  written. 

"  Tn  the  beginning  (of  the  creation)  was  the  Wore! 
(Logos,  or  wisdom  of  God)  and  the  Word  was  with 
(an  attribute  of)  God,  and  the  Word  was  God,"  (in- 
finite or  omniscient.)  "  The  same  (Logos)  was  in 
the  beginning  with  God.  All  things  were  made  (form- 
ed or  planned)  by  him  (Logos  or  wisdom  personified.) 
And  him  the  Logos,  Word  or  wisdom  of  God,  isfirsr- 
]y  made  to  assume  a  personality,  it  allegorical ly  re- 
tains throughout  the  work.  Again,  "  In  him  (Logos) 
was  life;  (being)  and  the  life  was  the  light  (moral 
wisdom,  or  Gospel  truth)  of  men."  Verse  14th, 
"  And  the  Word  (Logos)  was  made  flesh;"  i.'e.  the 
wisdom  of  God  was  personified  by  the  writer,  for  the 
purpose  of  more  effectually  illustrating  it  by  practi- 
cal application  to  the  business  of  human  life.  As  an 
allegory,  we  think  the  Gospel  a  most  transparent  and 
invaluable  production;  while,  as  literal  •history,  u  is 
spiritless,  insipid  and  even  stultifying;  at  least  to  or- 
dinary common  sense! 

This  Gospel,  Hypothesis  again  declares,  and  con- 
sonantly with  the  work  itself,  was  written  fov 


198  TnnoLor.ir  \L  CRITICISMS. 

Jew*,  whom  Philo.  doubtless,  wished  to  benefit,  by 
this  superior  philosophy:  and  that  he,  most  ingenious- 
ly, however  unsuccessfully,  adopted  allegory  to  effect 
his  purpose,  which  only  failed,  from  having  met  with 
superstitious,  Hebrew  obstinacy  and  bigoted,  Mosaic 
infallibility — the  natural  and  inevitable  result  of  a  fic- 
titious political  Theocracy.  And  this  partiality,  or 
affection,  for  the  Jews,  appears  to  us,  much  more  like 
Philo,  than  like  God;  and,  therefore,  think  it  Philo's 
saying. 

That  the  general  character,  even  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, is  allegorical,  there  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt 
with  him,  who  has  attentively  reflected  upon  its  moral 
tracts.  The  story  of  Joseph  was  doubtless  fabricated, 
with  the  view  of  practically  illustrating  the  virtue 
and  effects  of  continence,  or  self  command;  whilst 
that  of  Job  is  equally  explicit  upon  the  point  of  pious 
resignation  to  whatever  a  Providence  shall  dispense. 
Nor  can  we  imagine  a  clearer  illustration  of  moral 
cowardice  and  its  opposite,  than  is  contained  in 
those  tracts,  or  allegories  denominated  Jonah  and 
Daniel,  \vhile  literally,  they  are  subjects  of  derision 
or  contempt.  And  here,  the  author  of  the  Gospel 
found  a  precedent,  sufficient  to  justify  himself.  Nor 
would  any  other  mode,  than  that  of  allegory,  have 
promised  half  as  much  success,  'among  an'  ignorant 
and  superstitious  race.  Nor  did  he  fail,  most  faith- 
fully, to  follow  the  example.  In  proof  of  which  we 
make  the  following  references. 

At  the  fifth  chapter  of  Mark,  we  find  an  account  of 
a  maniac,  which  we  are  unable  to  interpret  in  any 
other  manner,  than  as  an  allegory. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  199 

We  think  the  writer  adopted,  and  most  appropri- 
ately too,  the  literal  maniac,  or  one  laboring  under 
the  disease  of  insanity,  as  a  most  fit  representative  of 
him,  who  yields  unqualified  obedience  to  the  dictates 
of  his  propensities. 

He  is  represented,  in  the  tale,  as  one,  on  whom  both 
common  and  extraordinary  means  of  reformation  and 
restraint  had  been  expended  uselessly.  In  fine,  that 
every  mean,  except  the  Gospel  influence  had  been 
vainly  tried.  -sL 

But  that  the  Logos  failed  not,  even  here,  of  its  re- 
cuperative and  salvatory  effect.  And  what  a  smudge 
envelopes  us,  whenever  we  most  stupidly,  contem- 
plate this  as  literally  true— A.  legion  of  itinerent,  vol- 
untary devils,  not  only  to  create,  but  uncreate  to  fit 
this  one  occasion. 

The  subject  of  a  trinity  of  divinities,  as  deducible 
from  the  Gospel,  is  doubtless  also  allegorical. 

God  has  been  long  contemplated  as  possessed,  or 
rather  constitued,  of  three  grand  attributes,  Power, 
Wisdom  and  Goodness,  infinitely  extended.  Power 
to  create— Wisdom  to  devise,  and  Goodness  to  direct 
the  system  of  the  universe.  Nor  could  less  than 
these  have  ever  formed  a  rational  idea  of  God  in- 
deed. Power  without  design  would  be  nugatory; 
whilst  both  power  and  design  might  be  abortive  or 
disastrous,  without  direction  to  a  proper  end. 

Almighty  power,  or  Omnipotence  personified,  ig 
therefore  God  the  creator,  and  individual  in  the  human 
mind — Wisdom,  Logos,  or  omnisciency,  is  reflective- 
ly engendered,  or  begotten  of  omnipotence,  as  indis- 


200  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

pensible  to  its  exercise;  and  hence  the  second  of  the 
three  personifications  that  constitute  the  trinity.-— 
Goodness,  or  beneficence,  is  likewise  reflectively  en- 
gendered, or  begotten  of  both  power  and  wisdom,  as 
being  also  indispensible  to  the  judicious  exercise  of 
these;  and  constitutes  the  last  of  these  three  allegorical 
individuals,  whose  aggregation  forms  the  trinitarian 
Godhead. 

Thus  have  we,  or  rather  our  Hypothesis,  disclosed, 
and  most  concisely  too,  our  notions  of  the  when,  the 
whence  and  wherefore  of  Christianity;  Nor  that  with- 
out regret,  that  want  of  opportunity  has  thus  restrict- 
ed us. 

We  are  come,  at  length,  where  Superstition  would 
HCOVV!  us  into  silence;  and  that  with  such  acerbity,  as 
should  turn  the  sweetest  milk  of  human  kindness  in- 
to bonnyclabber,  Y*Z,  to  the  question  of  the  divinity, 
or  superhuman  character  of  the  Gospel. 

Here  again,  we  find  ourselves  upon  the  negative- 
side  of  the  question,  where  hypothesis  is  unavoidable, 
and  plausibility  the  highest  point  attainable.  And 
yet,  there  are  numerous  facts  available,  that  stand 
much  nearer,  than  a  cousinshipj  to  real  demonstration, 
in  favor  of  our  position. 

Theology  assumes,  as  evidence  of  the  supernatural 
character  of  the  Gospel,  that  it  contains  superior  sen- 
timents, to  those  the  world  can  have  derived  from 
any  other  source. 

This  mav'j  nevertheless,  have  been  said  much  more 
in  honesty  than  in  truth.  At  least,  we  apprehend  no 
difticulty  in  its  entire  invalidation  both,  by  extrinsic 
circumstances,  and  intrinsic  discrepancies. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  201 

In  this  inquiry,  we  may  be  excused  for  calling  up 
the  Grecian  Socrates,  who  was  born  near  five  hundred 
years  before  our  era,  to  testify  in  our  behalf. 

Socrates  is  said  by  his  biographers,  to  have  aban- 
doned all  inquiries  concerning  the  origin,  and  physi- 
cal phenomena  of  NViture,  for  what  he  deemed  the 
higher,  or  more  important  departments  of  Religion 
and  Morality.  Yet,  although  he  neglected,  he  did  not 
despise  physical  or  natural  philosophy.  But  moral 
philosophy  was  the  subject  upon  which  he  expended 
his  best  attention;  and  wherein  his  success  was  so  ex- 
traordinary, that  it  was  said  of  him,  "  That  he  brought 
philosophy  down  from  heaven,  to  the  abodes  of  men." 
He  was  fully  convinced  of  the  existence  of  an  invisi- 
ble Creator  of  the  universe,  a  being  in  possession  of 
almighty  power,  wisdom  and  goodness,  and  who  rules 
the  world  by  a  providence  of  his  own.  The  existence 
of  this  Being  he  believed  was  clearly  deducible  from 
the  system  of  Nature,  and,  especially,  from  the  struc- 
ture of  tbe  human  frame.  And  that,  as  man  is  capa- 
ble of  reason,  its  author  should  be  much  more  amply 
endowed.  That  we  should  no  more  doubt  the  exist- 
ence of  Deity,  because  he  is  invisible  and  intangible, 
than  that  of  other  powers  or  principles,  known  only 
by  their  effects:  But  he  thought  the  question  about 
the  substance  of  the  Deity,  unprofitable  for  specula- 
tion; and  that  it  was  sufficient  that  we  clearly  appre- 
hend his  spiritual  nature.  Though  fee  was  educated 
in  polytheism,  and  sometimes  spoke  of  minor  deities, 
he  was  still  the  worshiper  of  one  only  God,  the  Crea- 
tor of  the  world,  and  the  Judge  of  mankind;  and  to 

25 


202  THKOLO&ICAL    CRITICISMS. 

whose  kind  providence  lie  traced  all  human  blessing*; 
and  maintained,  that  the  omniscient  and  omnipresent 
Deity  knows  everything,  and  observes  every  secret 
thought  and  action  of  mankind.  And  hence  our  duty 
to  wsrship  him  with  all  our  powers,  (mind,  might  and 
strength,)  and  one,  that  he  most  punctually  performed, 
both  in  public  and  private;  and  sincerely  believed, 
that  God  made  especial,  divine  revelations  of  himself 
to  his  sincere  petitioners;  and  that  his  holy  spirit 
warned  them  of  evil  and  aided  them  in  virtue  He 
taught  that  man  cannot  purchase,  but  must  merit,  the 
favor  of  God;  and  that,  by  a  blameless  life,  w  hich*is 
the  truest  and  best  service  of  the  Deity:  And  hence 
his  efforts  to  abrogate  all  sacrificial  worship,  to  which 
his  countrymen  were  obstinately  inclined,  and  to 
which  he  became  himself  an  offering.  He  considered 
prayer,  essential  to  a  virtuous  life,  and  taught  his  dis- 
ciples thus  to  pray.  ;'  Father  Jupiter,"  (the  Grecian 
name  of  God)  "  give  us  all  good,  whether  we  ask  it 
or  not;  and  avert  from  us  all  evil,  though  we  do  not 
pray  thee  so  to  do,"  (or  do  not  name  particulars.) 
u Bless  all  our  good  actions,  and  reward  them  with  suc- 
cess and  happiness.1'  He  believed  in  the  existence  of 
an  immaterial,  immortal  human  soul,  of  divine  origi- 
nal, and  eternal  destination;  ana1  connected  with  Deity 
by  consciousness  and  reason.  The.  improvement  of 
mind  he  considered  of  paramount  importance;  and 
self  knowledge  its  first  department;  and  that  he  who 
knew  all  things  else,  except  himself,  was  still  a  fool. 
He  distinguished  the  soul,  as  sensible  and  reasonable; 
or,  as  we  ^hould  say,  propensitive  and  rational. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  205 

The  soul's  immortality  he  deduced  from  its  dignity,  its 
vitalizing  energy,  its  activity  in  sleep,  and  from  the 
Mature  of  God  from  whom  it  is  derived.  He  viewed 
death  to  the  good,  as  but  a  transition  to  a  better  life, 
of  which  his  hope  was  confident  and  clear,  and  where- 
in, he  thought,  with  rapture,  of  meeting  the  virtuous 
of  other  ages.  He  was  fearless  of  death  and  judg- 
ment, in  the  consciousness  of  having  labored  after 
truth,  and  struggled  for  virtue;  but  believed  the  souls 
of  wicked  and  licentious  men  were  sentenced  to  unut- 
terable woe,  in  a  place  for  the  especial  retribution  of 
impenitent  wickedness.  He  made  religion  the  foun- 
dation of  morality:  And  that,  as  God  wishes  men  to 
be  virtuous,  they  should  therefore  be  so.  He  believed 
that  happiness  depended,  solely,  upon  the  perform- 
ance of  duty;  and  the  desire  of  it,  he  considered  as 
but  one  of  the  various  motives  to  the  performance  of 
virtue;  and  thus  established  an  intimate  connection 
between  virtue  and  religion.  He  had  the  highest 
conceptions  of  the  dignity  of  virtue;  and  declared  do- 
minion over  the  senses,  (propensities)  to  be  the  high 
est  state  of  freedom;  and  that  virtue,  only,  is  true 
wisdom:  Whilst  on  the  contrary,  he  deemed  vice 
identical  with  insanity.  See  this  allegorized  in  the 
three  first  Gospels,  Mat.  8,  28,  Mark  5,  2,  and  Luke 
8,  27.  His  yet  unsystemized  morality  was  founded 
upon  the  only  true  metaphysical  basis,  "Do  what  the 
Deity"  (or  His  proxy,  Conscience)  "commands  thee^" 
Anil  though  he  mistook  somewhat  the  character  and 
function  of  Conscience;  he  made  it  anjindispensabte 
•attribute  of  the  human  soul,  as  a  judge  and  director 


£04  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

between  right  and  wrong.  He  held,  that  human  prac- 
tice is  qualified  by  human  kno wedge;  and  that,  there- 
fore, perfect  knowledge  would,  infallibly,  insure  per- 
fect happiness.  He  defined  virtue  to  be  the  striving 
to  make  one's  self  and  others  as  perfect  as  possible, 
and  reduced  it  to  the  two  great  principles,  Temperance 
and  Justice;  the  former  embracing  duties  we  owe 
ourselves;  the  latter,  those  we  owe  to  others.  He 
defined  temperance  to  be  dominion  over  every  sensual 
impulse;  acid  this  he  regarded  as  the  basis  of  all  other 
virtues,  and  indispensable  to  the  proper  exercise  of 
Conscience  and  Knowledge.  He  held  injustice  to  be 
one  of  the  greatest  evils  ;  and  that  perfect  justice 
should  be  rendered  equally  to  friends  and  foes;  and 
that  men  should  reader  obedience  to  the  laws  of  their 
country,  however  unjustly  they  are  administered; 
and  that  the  golden  mean  (or  middle  way  between 
the  two  extremes)  should  be  carefully  observed  in 
every  thing. 

Thus,  you  are  presented  with  a  summary  of  a  No- 
tice of  the  great  Grecian  moralist,  to  be  found  in  the 
American  Encyclopedia,  under  its  appropriate  head; 
and  in  which,  you  can  recognize,  even  at  the  distance 
of  nearly  23  centuries  the  great  moral  luminary — the 
undoubted  prototype  of  Philo^s  Christ,  who  caught 
its  brilliancy,  and,  as  brightened  too  by  Plato's  fire, 
and  further  burnished  by  the  allegorical  inspiration  of 
the  Jew,  thence  reflected  its  broad  and  radiant  briL- 
liancy,  over  Europe  and  the  world. 

We  will  pass,  without  further  comment,  from  So- 
crates to  other  equally  veracious,  and  scarcely  less 


THEOLOGICAL,    CRITICISMS. 


205 


important,  testimony;  and  firstly,  call  Confucius,  the 
Chinese  prophet,  and  not  less  ancient  than  the  Greek, 
to  tell  what  he  once  thought  and  taught,  of  moral 
principle.  And  thus  he  testifies. 

That  temperance,  justice  and  the  minor  virtues 
are  indispensable  to  the  happiness  of  society.  That 
riches,  pomp  or  luxury  should  be  contemned,  while 
the  magnanimity,  and  greatness  of  soul,  which  make 
men  incapable  of  dissimulation  and  insincerity,  should 
be  carefully  encouraged:  And  that  a  life  of  reason  is 
incomparably  preferable  to  a  life  of  pleasure,  or  sen- 
suality. That  man  possesses  a  reasoning  soul,  which 
he  derived  from  Tien,  (God)  and  that  its  cultivation 
and  improvement  is  the  highest  and  most  useful  em- 
ployment of  man;  and  as  thus  improved,  should  be 
actively  employed,  in  the  improvement  of  others: 
And,  in  order  to  insure  success,  in  the  project  of  so- 
cial regeneration,  each  individual  should  begin  with 
himself,  and  thereby  add  the  weight  of  example  to 
that  of  precept.  We  should,  first,  become  that, 
which  we  would  have  others  to  be;  and  acquire  an 
indelible  love  of  virtue,  and  hatred  of  vice.  That  <i 
mean,  between  the  two  extremes,  should  be  invaria- 
bly observed,  which  is  the  essence  of  practical  virtue. 
Nor<n*e  we  willing  to  dismiss  our  Chinese  witness, 
until  lie  shall  have  spoken  a  single  sentence,  in  his 
own  impressive  manner.  :c  I  arn  a  man,"  said  he, 
"and  cannot  exclude  myself  from  the  society  of  men, 
and  consort  with  beasts.  Bad  as  the  times  are,  I  shall 
do  all  I  can  to  recal  men  to  virtue;  for  in  virtue  are 
all  things,  and  if  mankind  would  bat  once  embrace  it. 


'-;)0  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

and  submit  themselves  to  Its  discipline  and  law.-,  they 
would  not  want  me  or  any  body  else  to  instruct  them. 
It  is  the  duty  of  a  good  man,  first  to  perfect  himself, 
rind  then  to  perfect  others.  Human  nature,  came  to 
us  from  heaven  pure  and  perfect;  but  in  process  of 
time,  ignorance,  the  passions,  and  evil  examples  cor- 
rupted it.  All  consists  in  restoring  it  to  its  primitive 
beauty;  and  to  be  perfect,  we  must  reascend  to  that 
point  from  which  we  have  fallen.  Obey  heaven,  and 
follow  the  orders  of  him  who  governs  it.  Love  vour 
neighbor  as  yourself.  Let  your  reason,  and  not  your 
senses,  be  the  rule  of  your  conduct:  for  reason  will 
teach  you  to  think  wisely,  to  speak  prudently,  and  to 
behave  yourself  worthily  upon  all  occasions."  And 
here  we  find  an  antique  brilliant,  that  has  been  lately 
dug  from  out  the  long  since,  mouldering  relics  of  a 
former  time;  but  which,  with  little  burnishing,  reflects 
the  plainest  image  of  the  Gospel. 

Omitting  Plato,  to  whom  our  Hypothesis  has,  here- 
tofore, presumed  to  refer,  though  indirectly,  the  ori- 
gin of  Christianity,  we  next  call  up  the  Stoic  Zeno,  to 
tell  what  he  had  learned,  three  hundred  years  before 
the  Christ,  the  Living  Word,  was  born  of  Philo's 
brain,  or  else  adopted  from  the  Zend  Avesta. 

Of  Zeno  and  the  Stoics  we  learn,  that  philosophy 
is  the  way  to  wisdom,  which  is  itself  the  knowledge 
of  human  and  divine  things,  and  that  virtue  (or  mo- 
rality) is  its  practical  application  to  the  affairs  of  so- 
cial life.  That  man  should  aim  at  divine  perfection, 
as  the  only  way  to  insure  a  virtuous  life.  That  Rea- 
son governs  (orshould  govern)  the  whole  soul.  That 


,    CRITICISMS.  fOt* 

true  happiness  results  from  conduct,  that  is  dictated 
bv  reason,  and  harmonizes  with  both  God  and  Nature. 
That  men  should  live  in  conformity  to  the  injunctions 
of  reason  or  the  laws  of  animal  nature.  That  virtue 
is  the  highest  good,  and  vice  the  greatest  evil;  the  for- 
mer being  the  harmony,  and  vice  the  discord,  of  man 
with  himself;  anil  hold  to  the  existence  and  wor- 
ship of  one  God.  That  the  highest  virtue  consists  in 
self  denial,  or  the  perfect  control  of  the  animal  pas- 
sions, fin  fine,  the  doctrines  of  the  Stoics,  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  present  era,  had  acquired  so  near 
a  resemblance  to  the  Gospel,  that  they  -were  suspected 
of  having  been  borrowed  therefrom  .j 

We   would  be  indulged  with  the  liberty  of  introdu-. 
cing  one  more  witness  to  the  fact,  that  religious  views 
even  in  Pagan  Rome,   were  scarcely  inferior  to  those 
of  Christianity  itself,  more  than  seventy  years  before 
Christ  taught  the  Gospel. 

The  Roman  Cicero,  who  was  born  one  hundred  and 
six  years  before  the  Christian  era,  expresses  himself 
thus,  (as  the  translation  reads)  of  God  and  his  wor- 
ship. "  That  we  ought,  above  all  things  to  be  con- 
vinced that  there  is  a  Supreme  Being,  who  presides 
over  all  the  events  of  the  world,  and  disposes  of  them 
as  sovereign  loYd  and  arbiter:  thai  it  is  to  him  man- 
kind are  indebted  for  all  the  good  they  enjoy:  that  he 
treats  the  just  and  impious  according  to  their  respect- 
ive merits;  that  the  true  means  of  acquiring  his  favor, 
and  of  being  pleasing  in  his  sight,  is  not  by  the  use  of 
riches  and  magnificence  in  his  worship,  but  by  pre- 
senting him  with  a  heart  pure  and  blameless,  and  by 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

adoring  him  with  an  unfeigned  and  profound  venera- 
tion. 

Having  heard  the  testimony  of  these  witnesses 
whom  we  have  selected  from  different  countries  and 
at  different  periods,  the  last  of  whom  wrote  out  his 
affidavit,  three  quarters  of  a  century  before  the  Gos- 
pel was  promulgated;  will  you  still  believe,  that  noth- 
ing had  occurred  of  God,  of  piety  and  morals,  from 
which  the  Gospel  might  have  been  compiled  ?  Or 
that,  as  in  2d  Tim.  1,  10,  Life  and  Immortality  were 
brought  to  light,  (or  first  promulgated)  through  the 
Gospel :  If  so,  look  into  the  second  book  of  Macca- 
bees, at  the  seventh  chapter,  and  read  of  spiritual 
faith  and  hope  and  pious  continence;  and  blush  at 
both  your  incredulity  and  our  degenerate,  heartless 
mimicry.  And  here  we  also  find  the  earliest  intima- 
tion of  the  body's  resurrection;  and  having,  thus  acci- 
dentally, fallen  upou  this  curious  question  of  the  soul's 
new  tenement,  which  appears  to  be  particularly  de- 
serving of,  at  least,  a  passing  remark,  we  are  induced 
to  make  the  following. 

No  matter  how  intrinsically  absurd  the  dogma  is, 
since  it  constitutes  an  important  4tem  of  the  prevail- 
ing spiritualism  of  the  Christian  world.  It  thus  ac- 
quires a  nominal  consequence,  that  entitles  it  to, 
either  commendation  or  reproach.  And  although, 
like  the  subject,  of  which  it  seems  an  unapt  ap- 
pendage, like  a  crutch  to  him  w^ho  has  neither  leg,  it 
is  indeed  the  merest  fiction:  It  has,  nevertheless,  a 
name  and  an  existence,  at  least,  in  ideality,  and  has 
thence  a  claim  to  general  criticism. 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  209 

Having  admitted  the  existence  of  such  a  doctrine, 
as  the  resurrection  of  the  body,  subsequently  to  its 
natural,  or  organic,  dissolution,  our  first  inquiry 
should,  doubtless,  be,  after  the  time  and  manner  of  its 
origin. 

And  here,  again,  hypothesis  is  indispensable,  since 
no  positive  historical  dates,  nor  declarations,  are  avail- 
able to  our  present  purpose. 

The  earliest  evidence  of  the  dogma  of  a  resurrec- 
tion, among  mankind,  is  doubtless  found  in  the  apocry- 
phal book  called  Maccabees,  whose  date  is  assumed 
to  be  about  a  hundred  and  sixty-seven  years,  before 
the  Christian  era:  And  hence,  must  be,  at  least,  no 
much  older  than  the  Gospel.  But  since  we  have  no 
earlier  intimation,  that  such  a  sentiment  had  become 
sectarian,  as  it  seems  it  then  was  with  the  Essens,  it 
is  plausible,  at  the  worst,  to  conclude  it  to  have  been, 
at  that  time,  in  its  infancy,  which  is  all  we  ask,  or 
need,  in  our  behalf- 

More  than  three  hundred  years  before  our  era,  Pla- 
to taught  his  spiritualism  to  the  Greeks.,  who  at  that 
time  exercised  a  literary  censorship,  throughout  the 
world;  and  hence,  his  doctrines  must  have  been,  im- 
mediately, coextensive  with  the  spread  of  science. 
In  these,  the  world,  in  which  Judea  was  included,  was 
taught  the  dogmas  of  God,  of  Heaven,  the  soul,  its 
immortality  and  certain  destination  to  interminable 
weal  or  wo:  But  not  a  word  about  the  body's  resur- 
rection. And  wherefore  should  Plato  have  been  thus 
silent,  upon  a  subject  so  momentous?  Because  he 
made  the  human  soul  with  all  the  qualities  or  attri- 

N  26 


•110  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

butes  essential  to  its  immediate  translation  to  another 
world,  and  to  a  partici pation,  also,  of  its  pleasures  or 
its  pains:  And.  hence;  a  body  were,  at  best,  but  nuga- 
tory. 

f  But  this  literary  An  tens  had,  meanwhile,  reared  a 
Hercules,  to  lift  him  from  the  ground  of  his  enchant- 
ment, and  break  the  chain  with  which  he  had  so  gross- 
ly and  successfully  fooled  mankind.  \  es,  Aristotle, 
the  greatest  of  Plato's  pupils,  and  of  his  race,  con- 
tested, so  successfully,  his  master's  fallacy,  that  the 
-soul  could  move,  without  machinery,  or  feel,  without 
eorporality,  as  to  make  it  necessary  for  the  disciples 
of  Platonism  to  invent  the  resurrection  as  an  indis- 
pensable addition  to  their  former  creed  J  Nor  is  any 
thing  more  natural  than  this  result.  £or,  admitting 
what  it  was  impossible  that  Platonists  should  doubt, 
that  the  human  soul  is  inevitably  immortal,  and  yet 
inadequate  to  the  phenomena  of  its  destination  with- 
out the  aid  of  physical  machinery,  it  would  be  an  im- 
providence, with  which  God  should  not  be  chargea- 
ble, that  such  machinery  should  not  be  provided. 
And  hence,  the  body  would  be  finally  restored  to  its 
ibrmur  occupant;  and  that  the  same,  in  order  to  evade 
the  embarrassment  of  a  new  acquaintance. 

This  depredation  upon  Plato's  creed  may  have  been 
made  some  forty  years  after  its  promulgation,  that  be- 
ing about  the  difference  between  the  ages  of  these 
two  eminent  philosophers.  Yet,  that  of  Aristotle's 
must  have  beeu  embarrassed  by  the  other's  popularity, 
and  therefore  slowly  propagated.  For  this  result 
,  \ve  liav«  a  period  of  some  one  hundred  and 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS.  211 

fifty-seven  years,  antecedently  to  the  time  at  which 
t4iis  dogma  is  expressed  in  Maccabees.  A  time,  no 
doubt,  sufficient  to  effect  the  changes  we  have  here  as- 
sumed. And  thence,  we  think  tiie  silliest  fallacy, 
next  to  freedom  of  the  will,  originated,  and  the  most 
preposterous,  the  world  is  yet  to  be  ashamed  of. 

The  question  of  the  soul's  immortality  having,  thus 
fur,  stared  us  constantly  in  the  face,  it  seems  high 
time  its  "impudence  was  reproved:  And  as  the  short- 
est method,  we  will  make  an  effort  to  invalidate  the 
dogma  of  its  existence. 

Christianity  requires  that  man  shall  be  compounded 
of  two  distinct  identities,  the  body  and  tno  soul,  of 
distinct  character  and  formation.  To  apprehend  this 
subject,  even  superficially,  we  must  form  some,  more 
or  less  particular,  acquaintance  with  the  origin  and 
growth  of  organic  man. 

Every  individual,  subsequently  to    the   first,   must, 
according    to    any  admitted  principles  of  physiology, 
i  have  been  thus  developed. 

f  The  primitive  state  of  the  animal,  as  an  identity,  is 
/  that  of  a  minute  vesicle,  containing  an  unorganized, 
nearly  transparent,  liquid,  without  any  other  vitality 
than  what  is  consistent  with  a  secretion  fruin  the 
blood  of  its  parent.  But  this  is  not  the  farthest  we 
can  truce  its  origin.  We  found  it  a  secretion  from 
the  mother's  blood,  by  means  of  organs  which  did 
not,  themselves,  exist,  in  the  mother's  infancy,  arid 
hence  were  also  made  of  blood.  This  blood  was 
manufactured  from  the  mother's  nourishment,  and 
hence,  both  blood  and  vesicle  were  once  but  bread 
and  cheese. 


212  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

This  vesicle,  in  which  specific  animal  organism  ori- 
ginates is  entirely  incompetent  to  commence  the  pro- 
cess, without  a  new  and  vivifying  impulse  communi- 
cated to  it  by  the  other  parent.  Nor  is  this  less  true 
of  vegetable,  than  animal  development.  From  the 
reception  of  this  impulse  a  new  state  of  things  is  in- 
stituted. This  vesicle  acquires  the  character  of  an 
independent  being,  so  far  as  the  transmutation  of  un- 
organized, to  organized,  material  is  concerned;  and, 
thenceforth,  is  a  living,  organized  identity,  progress- 
ively and  successively  developed,  in  its  various  con- 
stituents, until  the  perfect  animal  is  completed,  which, 
however,  has  not  occurred  at  birth,  nor  does,  until 
the  age  of  puberty. 

We  may,  therefore,  be  allowed  to  ask,  At  what 
particular  period  of  this  being's  life,  does  it  acquire  a 
soul?  We  think  not,  while  unorganized.  And  if 
subsequently,  there  seems  no  one  so  eligible  as  that 
of  puberty:  For,  if  the  soul  includes  the  whole  psy- 
chology, or  mind  of  man,  the  inevitable  and  immedi- 
ate result  of  its  infusion,  must  be  a  clear  development, 
as  we  usually  observe  it. 

The  mind  of  man,  whatever  it  may  be,  most  cer- 
tainly, resembles  functionality.  It  bears  a  strict  anal- 
ogy to  muscular  motivity, being  apparently  developed, 
in  a  direct  ratio  of  that  of  material  organism,  from 
its  commencement  to  maturity;  whence  its  progress 
is  inverted,  and  it  marches  downward,  with  physical 
dissolution. 

Love  of  life,  has  been  adopted  as  a  most  cogent 
evidence  of  immortality.  Yet  nothing  can  be  more 
fallacious,  notwithstanding  its  plausibility,  with  the 


THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 


superficial  observer.  ^Love  of  life  is  a  propensity, 
like  that  of  acquisitiveness,  or  parisimony  if  you 
please,  and  subject  to  the  same  regulations;  and,  as 
are  all  the  rest,  indispensable  to  the  constitution  of 
the  perfect  animal.  Without  propensities,  neither 
thought  nor  voluntary  action  could  be  possibly  elicited.  J 

Nor  is  attention,  so  indispensable  to  successful 
thinking,  more  or  less  than  an  active,  persisting  pre- 
dominance of  some  single  propensity  over  the  rest. 
Hence  propensities  are  no  less  essential  to  humanity 
than  reason  and  reflection.  For,  supposing  man  to 
have  been  unendowed  with  a  propensity  to  live,  or  to 
eat,  or  in  other  words  without  vitativenesf.  or  alitnen- 
tiveness,  and  thus,  subjected  to  his  present  circum- 
stances. What  a  strange  improvidence  or  inadaptness 
would  be  thus  presented!  A  man  compelled  to  live 
and  eat,  without  a  wish  for  either;  and  hence,  a  con- 
stant miracle  required  for  these  results  !  Have  you  not 
often  seen  how  widely  different  is  the  love  of  money 
amongst  mankind?  Nor  is  the  love  of  life,  at  all,  less 
different!  While  one  individual  would  suffer  Jiim  self 
to  be  daily  skinned  by  the  butcher,  could  a  new  one  be 
recovered  in  the  interval,  rather  than  relinquish  his 
hold  on  life,  another  holds  this  gift  so  valueless,  as  to 
yield  it,  voluntarily,  at  the  merest  threatenings  of 
misfortune.  Q\nd  do  you  think,  that  these  propensi- 
ties, even  love  of  life,  or  reason  either,  survive  the 
wreck  of  organism?  Then  trace  their  declination 
from  manhood  down  to  dotage;  and  thence,  through 
imbecility,  to  absolute  fatuity,  and  then  evade  our 
owii  conclusion,  if  you  can!} 

With  few  exceptions,  an  intellect  most  vigorous  at 


Ill  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

50,  will  have  sensibly  declined  at  80:  ami  sunk  to  ut- 
ter childishness  at  100.  Thence  reflection  is  extin- 
guished, and  passion  devoured  by  itself:  and  the  last 
propensity  smouldering  in  its  ashes.  The  fire  of  ge- 
nius, that  once  outflowed  cotemporary  humanity,  is 
smothered  among  the  ruins  of  a  demolished  architect- 
ure. Nor  does  even  memory  throw  one  ray  of  light 
upon  the  mental  void,  by,  even,  dreaming  ot'  its  for- 
mer self.  The  external  senses  no  longer  respond  to 
their  appropriate  stimulants,  nor  preserve  the  connex- 
nexion  between  the  phenomena  of  the  world  and  the 
organ  of  conciousness  We  see  both  propensities  and 
affections,  one  after  another,  demolished  by  the  grim 
destroyer  of  present  forms,  and  thrown  back  amongst 
the  common  stock,  for  future  transmutation,  until 
nothing  remains  of  this  human  prodigy,  but  the  mere 
mockery  of  vegetation;  where  the  past  is  forgotten — 
the  present  unapprehended — and  the  future  uncontem- 
plated— life  itself  unvalued,  and  conciousness  of  iden- 
tity extinguished.  And  what  remains,  except  a  breath- 
ing organized  automaton?  And  where  this  love  of 
life,  that,  so  infallibly,  attests  the  truth  of  heaven  and 
immortality?  Gone,  like  the  function  of  a  worn-out 
dislocated  clock,  to  be  revived  in  the  tireless  pro- 
gress of  revolving,  transmutive  permutation. 

And  here  you  will  allow  rne  to  anticipate  a  question, 
that  Ignorance  has  already  proposed  a  thousand 
times,  and  doubtless  will  as  many  more,  viz.,fiVhere- 
fore  do  diseased  and  even  dying  persons,  not  unfre- 
quently,  retain  their  intellects  to  the  very  gasp  of  dis- 
solution? Simply  because  the  brain,  in  such  instan- 
ces, is  not  the  seat  of  disease,  nor  its  function  other 


THEOLOGICAL    Cli  IX  I  CIS.MS.  ?  1  ,') 

wise  impaired,  than  that  its  energy  diminishes  as  it 
tails  to  receive  its  necessary  support,  from  its  diseased 
or  dying  associated  And  thus  we  dispose  of  the-So- 
era  tic  phantoms,  denominated  soul  and  spiritual  im- 
mortality. 

Whilst  a  volume  would  scarcely  be  f>ufricient  to  ex- 
pose the  discordances  and  fallacies  of  the  New  Test- 
ament, we  are  restricted  to  scarcely  more  than  a  sin- 
gle paragraph,  and  that  the  termination  of  our  uniu- 
structive,  thankless  course. 

First,  of  the  genealogies  of  Christ,  as  recorded  liy 
Mat.  and  Luke.  Here  we  have,  for  the  same  period,  in 
the  former,  41  genearations,  (though  Matthew  declares 
them  to  be  42,)  and  in  the  latter  56,  a  difference  of 
15.  No  small  difficulty  to  be  surmounted  !  For  if  wo 
allow  but  41  generations,  v,e  have  about  49  years  for 
each,  or  an  average  of  17.  more  than  are  allowed, 
from  Shem  to  Tera-h.  And  if  56  are  allowed,  we  then 
have  an  average  length  of  nearly  36,  still  an  excess  of 
4  years,  over  the  length  of  those  more  ancient  ones. 

It  has  been,  most  foolishly,  or  impudently,  said,  that 
this  apparent  genealogical  discrepancy,  depends  upon 
the  misapprehension  of  the  fact,  that  one  belongs  to 
Jesus  and  the  other  to  Mary.  Why  should  one  have 
had  fifteen  more  ancestors  in  its  line,  of  equal  length, 
than  the  other?  And  why  should  they  both  end  in 
Joseph,  unless  he  were  the  father  of  both,  instead  of 
neither?  /And  here  comes  a  mouthful  for  the  ostritch 
stomach  of  Theology  to  digest.  If  Christ  was  be- 
gotten of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  not  of  Joseph,  how 
could  he  have  been  related  to  David  or  Jesse,  by  the 
way  of  Joseph^  Again, did  Herod  murder  hundreds  of 


•JIG  THEOLOGICAL    CRITICISMS. 

children  in  Bethlehem  and  all  its  coasts,  nor  history 
have  blabbed  of"  such  denionian  cruelty?  Did  Jesus 
lind  Andrew  and  Simon,  as  he  was  walking  by  the 
sea  of  Galilee,  as  in  Matthew,  Mark  and  Luke?  Or 
before  he  \veni  there, as  in  John?  Did  Peter,firstly  deny 
iiis  master,  to  a  maid,  while  sitting  without  in  the 
palace;  and  again  to  another,  in  the  porch;  and  also  a 
third  time  before  the  cock  crew,  as  in  Matthew;  and 
at  the  same  time,  as  in  John,  make  his  first  denial  as 
he  passed  in  with  another  disciple,  and  secondly,  to 
the  officers  and  servant  of  the  court,  not  a  maid,  wrhile 
standing  and  warming  himself?  And  did  Judas,  as  in 
Matthew,  cast  down  the  price  of  treason,  and  go  and 
hanif  himself?-  And,  at  the  same  time,  as  in  Acts, 
purchase  a  field  with  the  reward  of  iniquity;  and, 
falling  headlong,  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all 
his  bowels  gush  out?  ^When  the  two  Marys  visited 
Christ's  sepulcher,  was  there  and  was  there  not,  a 
great  earthquake?  Or,  did  none  but  Matthew  deem 
the  thing  worth  mentioning ?j  Did  they  come,  as  in 
Mat.,  as  it  began  to  dawn,  and  at  the  same  time,  at  the 
rising  of  the  sun,  as  in  Mark?  And  also,  as  in  John 
while  it  was  yet  dark?  Did  Mary  Magdalene,  visit  the 
sepulcher  with  the  mother  of  James,  and  at  the  same 
time,  alone?  Or  did  she  do  both  these,  and  at  the  same 
time  have  other  company  also  ?  Did  she  find  the  sepul- 
rher  closed, and  at  ihe  same  time  unclosed  ?  Did  she  see 
an  angel  descend, and  remove  the  stone, and  sit  upon  it; 
and,  also,  the  stone  to  have  been  already  removed,  and 
nothing  upon  it?  Did  she  seethe  angel  sitting  upon  the 
stone, \vithout,and  at  the  same  time, within  ?  And  did  she 
see  two  angels5and:at  the  same  time.butone?  &c.  &c— 


AN  ADDRESS 


TO    THE 


GENIUS  OF  POVERTY 


A  POEM  IN  TWO  CANTOS. 


BY  AN  EXPERIMENTALIST. 


184S. 


1-0 


»•(  brr/ 
»ift 


* 
ariJ  llmi  ,o»7»«t^ 

If  tW\iow  hn/ 
'.*'  ()«rhlii  ow 


.*«i-kv»H  »dJ 
And  why  shpuld'st  tbmi  be  scouted,  as  an  imp 

Of  Satan,  and  condemned  to  Infaiffj^'    ^ 

As  though  thou  wert,  not  less,  accessory      ,,avtf, 

To  hian's  depravity,  than  to  his  grief? 

Thou  hast  been  charged,  of  old  time,  as  the  blight  — 

The  mildew  of  man's  brightest,  earthly  hopes, 

And  spoiler  of  his  noblest  enterprise; 

The  strfler  of  his  out-side  piety^  j^^  .  „ 

(The  sine  qua  non  of  its  growth  within) 

Nor  yet,  wert  named  in  Eden's  catalogue 

Of  condemnations  and  delinquences  ! 

.;. 
Thy  biography,  were  it  written  out, 

And  with  a  Peacock's  feather,  would  almost 

Match  the  Pilgrim's  Progress;  and,  quite  excel 

The  twisticals,  of  Boz's  Oliver, 

Which  seem  too  heavy,  to  have  been  written, 

Entirely,  with  the  plucking  of  a  wing: 

And  yet,  it  is  no  literary  trash, 

Would  find  a  place  in  Littell's  Museum! 


No  book  produced  by  mortal  intellect, 
Save  Gulliver's,  (for  Moses  was  inspired) 
Is  so  corpulent,  with  the  marvelous, 
And  yet,  those  marvels  true,  as  thine  would  bel 
And  could'st  thou  realize  the  ample  fund, 
in  any  currency,  but  Biddle's  rags, 
And  those,  above  the  fraction  of  a  dime., 
Or,  even,  half  the  copyright  should  fetch, 
And  would,  if  offered  to  the  Harpers,  first, 
Thou  would'st,  as  suddenly,  unknow  thyself, 
As  did  the  Royal-little- Gentleman, 
When  knighted,  for  deftouring  Caroline:* 
Which  is  the  punishment,  John  Bull  inflict*, 
On  knaves,  for  trespassing  on  foreigners'! 

Dids't  thou  make  thy  first  debut  in  Eden, 
With  grandsire  Adam,  and  our  grandarn  Eve, 
And  other  gentry,  quite  too  amorous, 
To  trust  a  youthful  married  woman  with; 
And  yet,  escape,  withal,  the  fearful  curse, 
That  fell  on  other  luckless  spirits,  there; 
And,  in  the  artless  texture  of  a  leaf, 
Become  the  small  clothes  of  the  needy  pair? 
Nor,  wert  thou,  erewhile  thus  incorporate, 
!n  those  primeval,  undegenerate  times, 
Less  honored,  than  thine  after  substitutes. 
Mentioned,  onlv,  as  unmentionables! 


*The  boat,  destroyed  in  the  Schlosser  outrag' 


If  these  remarks  are  consonant  with  truth, 

Thou  could'st  not  then  have  had  the  threatening  scowl. 

That  makes  folks,  now,  detest  thee  so: 

For,  such  a  look  would  have  monopolized, 

Exclusively,  the  stock  of  curses  there; 

At  least,  if  they  had  been  dispensed  by  us: 

For  we  were,  never,  half,  so  much  annoyed, 

By  any  other  devil,  as  by  thee !    . 

And  strange  we  deem  it,  that  Omnipotence, 

Who  did  foresee  thy  fihhiness  and  rags, 

Nor  less  forebear  thy  murmurings  of  fate, 

And  reprehensions  of  a  Providence, 

That  fails  to  gratify  thy  selfishness 

Did  not  doom  thoe,  in  mercy  to  mankind, 

To  stop  and  curse  the  fiends  of  Tartarus! 

If  thou  wert  promised,  in  thine  infancy, 
A  day  of  cloudless  sunshine,  it  was  vain: 
For,  almost  ere  that  luminary  rose, 
The  flame-lit  clouds  gave  counter  evidence, 
That  a  storm  was  rising,  to  overwhelm  thee ! 

The  pride  of  Wealth  and  its  magnificence, 

Which  oft-times,  steals  out  human  hearts  and  bruins., 

Looked,  scornfully,  on  thy  humble  bearing, 

And  marked  thee,  as  the  prey  of  Opulence, 

Together  with  thy  numerous  progeny  ! 

And,  in  spite  of  Equity  and  Heaven, 

Thou  and  they  and  after  generations, 

Were  doomed  to  infamy  and  servitude, 

As  an  Inheritance ,  forevermore! 


And  by  thy  junior,  thus  in  bondage  held, 

*       J  J  e  3 

By  claim,  pretended  from  Omnipotence, 

In  vindication  of  accursed  wrong; 

As  though  Benignity  would  have  transmitted, 

From  its  throne,  a  license  lor  oppression! 

,    .,      ,  «r»x3 

Shameless  slander  of  a  God  of  justice, 
Who  hath,  with  nicest  impartiality, 
Dispensed  his  mercies,  equallv.  to  all; 

I  -1.5  3 

Nor  designed  the  rule  should  be  perverted! 

0  l  b«  * 

oAW 

Thy  history  declares,  the  time  was  once, 

When  all  thy  caste  was  stigmatized  as  brutes, 

To  feed  on  threats,  and  grieve  in  thankfulness^ 

Or  suffer  scourging  for  ingratitude. 

Nor  do  we  lack  examples,  nearer  home, 

(We  hope  Judge  Lynch  wont  hear  the  allusion) 

Of  metamorphosing  men  to  cattle; 

Though,  not  exactly,  by  the  Power  Divine, 

By  which  hereditary  Kings  are  made, 

But  what  is  nearest  in  authority, 

That  of  the  Federal-Constitution, 

Which  owns  the  equal  rights  of  all  mankind, 

And  therefore  deems  the  African  a  beast! 

For  else,  his  freedom  is  as  well  secured 

By  this  same  Compact,  paramount  to  law, 

As  that  of  any  yankee-mother's  son, 

Whose  sire,  the  war-torch  lit,  at  Lexington  ! — 

Glorious  Spirit  of  Seventy -six, 

Which  did,  the  fetters,  of  the  black-man,  fix. 

Through  countless  generations  of  his  race; 


Nor  heeded  the  anomalous  disgrace, 

Of  rearing  its  standard,  in  name  of  God, 

And  striping  its  flag,  with  the  negro's  blood; 

Bestowing  its  freedom  on  all  our  kin, 

Whom  nature  wrapped  not,  in  too  dark  a  skin ! 

Thus  doth  Columbia's  Charter  secure 

The  mutual  justice,  of  Simon  Pure! 

Nor  is  dominion  counter  to  the  plans 

Of  brawling,  nominal  republicans! — 

With  whom,  liberty  is  another  name 

For  downright,  political  recklessness 

Of  all  the  rules  a  wise  Consistency 

Has  established,  for  its  preservation — 

A  liberty,  that  bold  Licentiousness 

Might  feed  upon,  to  gouty  corpulence — 

That  fain,  would  make  Philosophy  and  Art 

Shake  hands  with  Ignorance  and  Quackery. 

And  call  this  breach  of  Nature's  institutes — 

This  impracticable  absurdity, 

Sublime,  political  equality — 

A  liberty  that  spurns  a  guardian, 

Though  it  were  a  Deity  incarnate ! 

Nor  will  it  yield  the  insane  privilege, 

Of  being  cheated,  and  imposed  upon 

By  any  false  pretender,  who  shall  choose 

To  expend  his  wit  in  that  direction! 

As  those  ancient  chronicles  inform  us. 
Whose  veracity  must  not  be  doubted, 
Thou  wert,  firstly  manacled,  where  the  Nile 
Made  corn  abundant,  yet  where  vassals  starved: 


Where  slaves,by  thousands, wrought  for  one  mmllorii, 

And  other  millions,  for  an  insane  king; 

Where  princely  vanity  could  gorge  itself, 

With  lumbrous,  architeet'ral  monuments 

Obelisks,  Pyramids  and  Labyrinth, 

For  Glory,  Sepulture  and  Sacrilege; 

Nor  grieve  at  such  a  reckless  sacrifice, 

Of  human  flesh  and  sinews,  as  should  draw 

Tears,  from  an  eyeless,  marble  monument'. 

That  thou  wert,  next,  enslaved  in  Palestine. 

By  those  annointed  Hebrew  Partialists, 

That  claimed,  by  contract  of  the  Deity. 

The  entire  beneficence  of  Heaven: 

Nor,  like  innumerous,  modern  Christians, 

Would  they  admit  a  soul  to  Paradise, 

But  through  the  slough,  of  their  formalities! — 

Thenceforth,  the  world,  (for  such  were    Greece  and 

Rome,) 

Assumed  the  right  to  scourge  thee  at  its  will: 
And  tho'  that  world  has  met  sad  changes  since. 
It  has  not  changed  its  hate  of  thee, 
Except  in  few  and  rare  particulars ! 

Thou  art,  tho'  men  have  known  thee  long  too  well. 

A  thing  anomalous — inscrutable, 

And  which  no  single  definition  fitsf 

Chameleon  like,  thou  art  as  changeful 

As  conscience,  fashion  and  opinion  are! 

For  that  which  bears  thine  epithet,  to-day 


Mightj  yesterday,  have  been  called  competence, 
And  to-morrow,  with  equal  justice,  wealth. 

Like  one,  who  holds  left-handed  sentiments, 

Of  Religion,  Politics  or  Morals, 

Or  like  a  debtor  irresponsible, 

Thou  art  unwilling  to  expose  thy  stale 

Of  feeling,  or  of  funds!— 

Kind  hearted  thing! 
To  be  so  careful  of  our  sympathies, 
As  though  we  had  a  wish,  to  waste  on  thee, 
But  that  thou  had'stbeen  drowned  with  Egypt's  Host 
Nor  lived,  to  snarl  at  Providence  so  long. 
For  ills,  thy  sordidness  hath  merited  ! 

Thou  art  as  friendless  as  ophthalmia, 

Or  Parsimony,  Toothache3  or  the  Gout, 

And  as  heartily  contemned  as  Treason  ! — 

And  so  thou  should'st!  for  rank  duplicity, 

The  vilest  trait,  in  Satan's  character, 

And  e'en  in  some,  who  own  him  not  as  master. 

Has  marked  thy  wanderings,  six  thousand  years 

And  yet  thou  would'st.  like  most  of  us,  be  thought 

Possessed  of  virtues,  which  were  never  thine; 

And  charge  on  others,  want  of  complaisance, 

While  thou  dost  not,  one  whit,  respect  thyself! 

Thou  art  the  cringing  sycophant  of  Wealth, 
Whom,  meanwhile,  thou  pretendest  to  despise ! 
Norcan'st  yet  sustain  e'en  Honor's  shadow, 
Without  a  golden  crutch,  to  lean  upon ! 
Nor  is  such  lameness  rare,  among  mankind  i 


to 


To  imitate  Wealth's  worst  delinquencies. 
And  play  the  tyrant,  well,  with  Beggary, 
Seems  the  apex  of  thy  mean  aspirings. 
Such  baseness  fits  thee,  for  a  paltry  slave. 
And  shapes  thy  pliant  limbs,  for  manacles! 
The  ape  and  mocking-bird  excel  thee,  more. 
In  principle  than  art!  For  they  do  not. 
Select,  for  imitation,  but  the  worst, 
Of  all  the  practical  examples, 
Of  prank  and  voice,  but  fain  attempt  the  whole! 

Thou  art  the  pander  of  Licentiousness, 

The  supple  catspaw  of  thine  enemy, 

To  scratch  out  nuts,  from  where  'twould  burn  its  owu  ! 

Not  much  unlike,  some  talking  animals. 

Who,  being  served,  (ungrateful  fratricides) 

Then  serve  themselves,  by  sacrificing  those, 

Who  have  been  catering  for  their  baseness! 

Yet  thou,  with  all  these  staius  upon  thy  hands, 

Art  no  less  sensitive,  when  honor  ;s  touched, 

Than  though,  memory  had,  to  thee,  turned  traitor, 

And  left  thee  unacquainted  with  thyself! 

Or  wert  a  Congress  man,  or  Col.  Webb. 

To  murder  folks  in  injured  manhood's  cause, 

While  the  transaction  proves  themselves  are  beasts! 

And,  were  detraction  whispered  in  thine  ear, 

Thy  carcase  would,  like  a  percussion  cap, 

Explode,  and  let  thy  mammoth  spirit  out, 

To  plant  a  Cypress,  on  a  mad-man's  grave  f 


11 


So  much  like  human  nature  is  thine  own, 

Thou  wilt  worship  all  of  earth,  that  glistens, 

Or  bears  the  stamp  or"  Mammon,  on  its  back  ! 

And  he,  who  hath  what  thou  hast  sought,  in  vain. 

Hath  thy  reproaches,  and  thine  envy  too! 

Meanwhile,  thou  art  vociferously  mad 

With  human  folly,  for  its  love  of  gold, 

Which,  thou  sayest,  is  so  idolatrous. 

That  Elysium  would  be  rejected, 

Unless  it  were  a  mint,  for  coining  cash, 

And,  also,  Immortality  refused, 

(Were  it  a  thing  provisional,) 

If  unemployed  in  counting  o'er  the  trash  1 

Our  answer,  to  thy  charge,  must  be  concise! 
We  wish  it  were,  both,  false  and  slanderous! 

Thou  sayest,  and  thy  saying  is  too  true, 
(Though,  in  thy  fits  of  frenzy,  for  the  stuff. 
Which  Fate  determined  should  elude  thy  grasp.) 
That  gold  perverts  the  Law,  and  smothers  Truth — 
That  Justice  cannot  hold  her  scales,  so  tight, 
That  dust  will  not  disturb  its  equipoise  ! 
And,  lo!  thy  sense  of  right  is  so  acute, 
(And  sharper,  much.,  for  its  apprenticeship.) 
That  thy  philanthropy  calls,  loud  and  Jong, 
To  have  the  order  of  the  thing  reversed, 
And  then,  the  balance,  to  thy  jaundiced  eye. 
Would  be,  most  admirably,  adjusted  ! 

Thou  sayest,  also,  that  the  tyrant  Wealth 
Assumes,  too  much  dictation,  and  controls,         > 


Disastrously,  the  fashion  of  the  world, 

Which,  blindly,  runs  a  jack-a-lantern  race, 

After  the  shadow  of  fictitious  worth! 

So  it  does;  and  so  thou  would 'st,  if  thou  could'st! 

Or  professions  have  much,  higher  merit, 

In  thy  case,  than  they  ever  had  in  ours: 

For  men,  who  \vould  be  Neroes,  if  in  power, 

Are  most  obsequious,  in  manacles; 

And  he,  who  would  live  free,  or  cease  to  live, 

Would  be — No!  he  would  not  be  a  master! 

Among  thy  numerous  complaints  of  Wealth, 

Thou  sayest  it  claims  honor,  not  its  due, 

In  rearing  all  those  mighty  piles  of  art, 

Whether  designed,  for  worship,  or  for  show. 

Whose  ruins,  yet,  attest  magnificence, 

At  which  the  traveler  gaps,  staringly, 

And  wonders,  at  the  human  enterprise, 

Which  could  have  planned  and  executed  works, 

Apparently  so  impracticable! 

Nor  apprehends,  that  these  were  monuments, 

Which  superstitious  Tyranny  hath  reared, 

In  ostentatious  show  of  piety, 

Or  to  inflate  the  pride  of  Opulence, 

And  at  a  waste  of  human  happiness, 

Which  recklessness,  itself,  should  deprecate! 

In  fine,  whatever  Intellect  hath  planned, 

Or  Labor  hath,  successfully,  accomplished. 

Beyond  the  value  of  a  moccason, 

Is  claimed,  exclusively,  as  Mammon's  v/ork; 

And  yet,  from  quarrying,  to  stuccoing, 


Not  a  hod  of  brick  nor  mortar  shouldered. 

Nor  a  hammer  nor  a  trowel  wielded. 

Except,  by  muscles  of  my  luckless  tribe! 

For  Beggary  is  not  available 

To  the  basest  projects  of  a  tyrant, 

From  lack  of  all,  but  begging  enterprise! — 

It  is,  in  truth,  too  mean  to  be  a  slave! 

Be  it  so!  Nor  would  we  contradict  it! 

Vet,  what  claim  hast  thou,  thou  madcap  braggart, 

To  the  half  a  thimble  full  of  merit, 

For  all  the  vaunted  labor,  thou  hast  done? 

Thou  would'st  have  been  no  less  contemptible 

And  indolent,  than  those  who  whittle  chips, 

And  muse  upon  the  unhallowed  means, 

Which  cunning  Indolence  bath  sometimes  found 

Successful,  in  replenishing  thy  ranks, 

And  most  unluckily,  from  out  the  midst 

Of  those  whom  God  hath  owned  his  noblest  work, 

Had  not  dire  necessity  compelled  thee! 

For  stubborn  Nature  is  not  changed  with  dress! — 

Knaves  are  the  same  with  epaulette  or  brand ! 

Where,  then  exists  thy  claim  to  moral  worth, 

For  doing  what  thy  virtue  ne'er  enjoined  ? 

We'll  tell  thee,  vvould'st  thou  know,  and  doubtless  true ! 

Where  the  religious  hyprocrite  will  find, 

The  blissful  plaudit  of  the  Deity; 

And  that,  as  Murphy  said,  of  land  he  owned, 

Is  not,  in  fath  sir,  either  here  or  there  ! 

The  chains  that  gall  thee,  thine  own  right  hand  forged, 
And  thy  servility  hath  riveted :— 


14 


Ask  not  redress  for  wrongs,  thy  baseness  sought, 

And  which,  thy  lameness  hath  solicited, 

As  though  a  slave  were  written  on  thy  brow ! 

The   faults,    thou  charges!  Wealth  and  Heaven  with. 

Proceed,  alone,  from  thy  delinquency! — 

Have  not  thy  virtues  been  apocryphal, 

And  thy  professions  slandered  by  thy  deeds? 

When  hath  thy  servile  spirit  ventured  forth, 

In  name  of  Truth,  of  Heaven  and  Equity. 

And  Nature's  holy  Impartiality, 

In  gallant  contest,  for  equality? 

When  hast  thou  owned  the  claims  of  Intellect, 

(Immortal  spark,  from  God  inherited. 

Consciousness,  memory,  and  contemplation 

Of  principles  and  joys  ineffable, 

And  for  which,  only,  Paradise  was  made) 

Above  the  groveling  propensities, 

Whose  base  indulgence  stigmatizes  man 

As  brother  of  the  beast  that  perishes, 

And  seems  the  limit  of  his  enterprise? — 

Never!  nor  ever  will,  while  thou  dost  kneel. 

In  humble  supplication  of  the  molten  god, 

Whose  greatest  benefaction  is  a  curse! — 

" 
Thy  motto  is,  as  it  hath  always  been, 

A  curse  on  wealth's  unjust  supremacy  ! 
And  yet,  thou  hast,  immemorially, 
Yielded  it  thine  envy  and  submission  ! 
Nor  hast  thou  ever  dreamed,  that  happiness 
Can  be  attained,  through  any  other  means! 


15 


And  yetj  Wealth  is  a  scorpion,  to  sting 

The  hand  that,  covetously,  would  grasp  it! 

And  had'st  thou  read  the  gospels,  thou  would 'st  know 

That  ragged  usefulness,  in  Heav'n's  account, 

Is  worthier  than  ermined  uselessness ! — 

And  that  humble  virtue,  wrapt  in  sackcloth, 

Is  still  a  Goddess,  brighter  in  her  tears, 

And  happier  than  wealth  or  flattery, 

Or  stars  or  crowns  can  make  Licentiousness! 

And  so  hath  God,  in  equity,  decreed! 

There  is  a  way  which  he  who  runs  may  read, 

For  thee  and  thine,  to  be  unmanacled, 

As  sure  as  mandate  of  the  Deity ! 

Nor  is  it,  otherwise  than,  wonderful, 

That  thou  should'st  not  have  sought  it  earlier, 

And  broke  the  chain,  by  which  wealth  rules  the  world  ! 

Thou  shoulcT'st  discard  the  idol,  Opulence, 

And  worship  at  the  Goddess  Reason's  shrine! 

Her  response  will  teach  thee,  clear  as  sunlight, 

How  thy  manacles  may  be  dissevered; 

And  thine  unpitied  subjugation, 

To  the  Tyrant,  Wealth,  forever  ended! 


CANTO  II. 


Would'st  thou  break  the  chain,  that  binds  thee  closer. 

To  Wealth's  contemptible  idolatry. 

Than  is  the  native.  Pagan  Indian  bound 

To  the  accursed  Car  of  Juggernaut? 

Discard,  forthwith,  that  slander  of  the  truth. 

Which  says,  that  wealth  produces  happiness: 

A  plant  congenial,  but  to  virtue's  soil, 

And  reared  by  vigilant  cultivation; 

Nor  still  perpetuate  thy  name  and  woes, 

By  wearing  Mammon's  tinsel  livery, 

Which  cheats  thee,  of  thy  cash  and  credit,  too. 

And  fits  thee,  for  a  beggar  or  a  thief! 

Descend  not  to  the  basest  mimicry, 

Of  Folly's  first  and  worst  delinquency, 

A  gaudy,  superficial  frippery; 

But,  frankly,  own  thy  name  and  character, 

And  miss  the  stigma  of  duplicity, 

Which  seems,  too  deeply,  graven  on  the  heart 

Of  man,  to  be,  by  reason,  burnished  out. 

Or  extinguished  by  regeneration ' 


We've  said,  thou  shoulcPst  invoke  the  Pythoness 

Of  Wisdom's  Temple,  (\vhb  is  Reason's  self, 

Improved  by  patient,  useful  discipline, 

Amongst  earth's  real  apprehensibles) 

To  teach  thee,  how  thou  shalt  release  thyself, 

At  once,  from  a  disgraceful  servitude; 

And  furthermore,  how  wrongly,  thou  hast  judged 

Of  Wealth's  exclusive  aptitude  for  bliss! 

The  rule,  thou  hast  adopted  for  thy  guide, 
In  adding  up  and  balancing  accounts, 
Between  thyself  and  Mammon's  favorite, 
Was  not  proposed  by  Solomon  nor  Paul; 
But  smacks  of  Parsimony's  rule  of  three, 
Which  proves,  as  clearly  as  the  a,  b,  c. 
That  good  for  you  is  better,  still,  for  me! 
And  thus,  thou  hast  augmented,  wrongfully, 
Wealth's  real  happiness  above  thine  own. 

Thy  mouth  is,  doubtless,  full  of  verbal  proofs, 

In  form  of  oathful  asservation. 

That,  of  the  warp  and  woof  which  wealth  enjoys. 

Thou  would'st  weave  an  interminable  web 

Of  most  exquisite,  earthly  happiness — 

A  Cashmere  suit,  for  every  brat  of  thine ! 

And  so,  fell  Parsimony  promises 

To  its  inimitable  self,  at  least; 

And  hence  it  starved,  to  hoard  the  magic  stuff. 

In  which,  like  almost  all  mankind,  ic  thinks 

The  very  soul  of  happiness  resides ! 

And,  as  a  most  judicious  episode, 

It  steals  thy  very  rags,  to  clothe  itself! 


18 


Success,  on  such  a  plan,  can  scarcely  fail, 
Oftener  than  \vouid  a  vigorous  attempt. 
To  lift  one's  self,  by  tugging,  lustily, 

At  boot-straps,  or  waistband  of  one's  breeches! 

> 

Nor  is  Ostentation  more  successful 
Than  Parsimony,  in  the  bliss  it  seeks  ! 
And  though,  apparently,  less  groveling — • 
Less  soiled  by  loam,  than  by  licentiousness, 
There's  not  a  vice  so  reprehensible, 
With  the  exception  of  Intemperance, 
Whose  omnipotence  is  proverbial, 
In  transmuting  manhood  to  beastliness, 
As  we  think  this  same  ostentation  is! 
Nor  has  it  'mongstthe  foes  of  righteousness. 
Or  of  mutual,  social  happiness. 
A  single,  other,  fair  competitor! 

Each  follows  out  the  promptings  of  its  own 

Indomitable,  base  propensity, 

And  would  monopolize  the  world  itself, 

Were  not  its  pow'r  unequal  to  its  ends! 

The  oiie,  in  order  to  maintain  a  state 

Of  base,  contemptible  magnificence, 

For  the  exquisite  glorification, 

Of  being  gaped  at  by  the  idiot! 

The  other,  in  its  fearful  providence. 

Would  miss  the  thousand  curses,  heaped  on  thee, 

And,  therefore,  lives  the  very  mimic 

Of  the  character,  it  so  much  detests ! 

So  near  together  are  the  two  extremes ! 

What  vvould'st  thou  profit,  therefore,  by  exchange 


19 


Of  state  and  character,  with  those  we've  named?— 

E'en  Beggary,  itself,  would  be  insane, 

To  swop  its  very  worst  estate  with  either! 

Each  is  engaged  in  vigilant  pursuit 

Of  exclusive,  individual  bliss, 

Which  both,  remotely  miss,  and  equally: 

For  Happiness  is  perched  on  Reason's  shield, 

Whose  standard  is  erected  just  midway, 

Between  these  antipodes  of  wretchedness, 

The  furbished,  and  the  furfuraceous: 

And,  surely,  thou  dost  offer  evidence, 

Amidst  thy  lengthened  catalogue  of  faults, 

As  indubitable  as  truth  itself, 

That  thou  art  much  less  mischievous  than  they: 

And  yet,  thy  virtue,  like  the  most  of  ours, 

Is  both  negative  and  apocryphal  : 

For,  that  thy  guilt  is  less  than  theirs  is  not 

From  want  of  inclination,  but  of  power; 

Therefore,  until  thy  principles  are  changed, 

Thy  miseries,  with  thy  means,  would  multiply: — 

Success  would  stultify  thine  intellect, 

And  indolence  destroy  thine  enterprise; — 

So  that  thou  might,  successfully,  contest, 

With  human  things,  the  prize  of  infamy! 

Awake!  and  take  a  peep  at  destiny,, 
As  fate  hath  settled  it  with  human  kind. 
And  as  God,  in  Scripture,  hath  revealed  it! 
There,  thou  may'st  measure  with  exactitude, 
The  length  and  breadth  of  both  thy  weal  and  wo; 
Nor  Heaven,  nor  Fate,  hath  meditated  ill 
To  thee;  but,  to  thy  moral  turpitude! 


Tliy  name,  in  Christendom,  was  coupled  onee, 

AVith  saintly  and  prophetic  piety; 

And  thought  to  be  almost  synonymous. 

With  unsophisticated  holiness! — • 

And  who,  from  choice,  became  thy  devotee, 

Was  honored  as  a  saint,  and  deified ! 

And  so  he  might  be  now,  with  little  risk 

Of  multiplying  acts  of  sacrilege; — 

For  no  one  knows  thee,  and  detests  thee  not, 

Unless  his  fast-receding  sinciput 

Proclaims  his  irresponsibility: 

Nor  was  it,  anciently,  a  small  mistake, 

That  thine  was  thought  the  name  of  righteousness! 

For  thou  hast  not,  from  thy  birth,  been  better, 

Nor  more  deserving  of  respc  ow: 

Nor  was  the  £laim  of  Lazarus  to  Heaven, 

Improved  by  his  companionship  with  thee, — 

But  that  he  bowed  not,  in  idolatry, 

To  a  golden  calf}  wh.ich,  interpreted, 

Means  adoration  of  a  wealthy  Fool! 

This  sacrilege  has  been,  amongst  mankind 
So  nearly  universal,  hitherto, 
That  an  exception  has  been  ever  deemed 
A  most  remarkable  phenomenon! 
And  while  thou  shalt  continue  to  succumb- 
To  any  less  authority  than  God;s, 
Or  Reason's  (its  admitted  substitute, 
\n  all  emergencies  apocryphal: 
For  understanding  comcth  from  the  LercL 
Qr  Solomon,  for  once,  mistook  the  truth) 


Thine  unbroken  manacles  will  bold  thee, 
To  a  servitude,  not  unmerited  ! 

Nor  hath  Idleness  escaped  thine  envy. 

Whene'r  Inheritance  enabled  it 

To  riot  boldly  in  licentiousness: 

And  when  reduced  to  starving  nudity, 

(The  doom  Heav'n  stamped  on  its  delinquency, ; 

Thou  hast  o'erlooked  its  culpability, 

And  wasted  thy  reproaches  on  its  rags! 

This  truth  is  clear,  whatever  blockheads  think: 

Were  not  thy  ranks  repaired  by  Indolence, 

They  would  dwindle  to  the  merest  shadow. 

And  thine  would  be  recruits  of  competence  ! 

Thou  hast  deemed  labor  ignominious, 
As  though  it  were  exclusively  for  slaves; 
And  that  true-freedom's  definition  is, 
Release,  from  the  restraints  of  usefulness. — 
.  \  {n  this  thou'dost  resemble  some"  of  u.s, 
Who  deem  it,  clearly,  a  primeval  curse, 
That  man  must  be  familiar  vvuU  the  sail, 
A^hd  barter,  for  his  bread,  his  daily  toii; 
And  rather  than  appear  so  ungenteel, 
Will  practice  ev'ry  fraud,  and  sometimes  steal: 
As  though  the  Deity  had  branded  labor 
With  his  most  emphatic  malediction, 
And  the  soiling  fingers,  as  a  stigma. 
Too  foul  for  soap  and  water  to  remove! 
These  are  the  dogmas  of  Theocracy, 
Inherited  by  aristocracy. 
But,  thanks  to  God  and  the  Devolution; 


To  Liberty  and  our  Constitution; 

This  twin  inheritance,  with  worldly  wealth, 

Too  often  gained  as  basely,  as  by  stealth, 

Will  slip,  together,  through  the  grandson's  hands, 

Or  Heav'n  has  recently  revised  its  plans! 

Hebrew  Theocracy  assumed  the  right, 

To  despoil  the  heretic  Canaanite, 

Enslave  his  infants,  gorge  upon  his/ blood, 

In  name  of  Justice,  Piety  and  God. 

'Tis  aristocracy's  calculation, 

To  succeed  as  well  by  legislation. 

The  one  with  bigoted  temerity, 

Would  crucify  the  Christ  for  heresy: 

The  other  sooner^  than  resign  its  place, 

Would,  doubtless,  crucify  the  human  race! 

What  Theocracy  achieved  by  bravery, 

Aristocracy  hath  wrought  by  knavery. 

One  has  met  deserved  retribution, 

In  the  course  of  civil  revolution: 

The  other's  fate,  we  think  we  know  as  well, 

And  yet,  would  wait  for  ballotings  to  tell, 

Which,  doubtless,  are  as  unequivocal. 

We,  surely,  have  been  wandering  from  our  text, 

And  must  have  known  it,  had  we  not  been  vexed. 

But  since  we've  fully  cancelled  thy  demands, 

We'll  pass  thee  over  into  better  hands ! 

Hark  ye,  then,  to  Reason's  admonition, 

Corroborated  by  the  word  of  God, 

And  plainly  registered,  in  Holy-Writ. 

And  thus  we  heard — or  dreamed  that  Reason  spoke. 


23 


"  Desist  from  Mammon's  service,  nnd  henceforth. 

Appreciate  money,  at  its  real  worth. 

And  dost  thou  ask  its  value — I  reply, 

That  of  the  real  happiness  'twill  buy. 

Render  obedience  to  God  and  me, 

Which  constitutes  genuine  liberty. 

Not  the  factitious,  the  licentious  know, 

Which  works  their  own  inevitable  wo; 

But  one  of  holiness,  without  alloy, — 

The  freedom  which  the  sons  of  God  enjoy. 

Thus  shall  every  votary  of  mine, 

Bask  in  the  rays  of  liberty  divine. 

"Had'st  thou  but  known  and  heeded  Agur's  prayer, 

Of  Bible  specimens,  the  finest  there, 

Which  shames  vain  man's  loquacious  levity, 

As  much  in  spirit  as  in  brevity, 

Thou  would'st  have  deprecated  Mammon's  gii'i.s. 

No  less  than  thou  hast  done  thy  luckless  shifts. 

"  The  prophet  prays,  as  warmly,  as  for  health, 
To  be  preserved  from- Poverty  and  Wealth. 
What  can  be  gathered  from  a  prayer  like  this, 
But  that  the  two  are  equal  foes  to  bliss?—- 
And  what  induction  can  be  plainer  seen, 
Than  that  the  proper  place  is  one  between  ? 
Nor  can'st  thou,  in  this  instance,  fail  to  See. 
That  holy  Agur  and  myself  agree. 

"  Heav'n  cannot,  pecuniarily,  dispense 
A  blessing  so  exact  as  competence! 
He,  therefore,  who  solicits  less  or  more, 
Invokes  a  curse,  possession  must  deplore: 


-Tis,  therefore.  Competence  I  will  protost. 
Alone,  can  make  an  earthly  spirit  blest: — • 
And  though  attainable  by  common  sense, 
'Tis  oft  extinguished  by  i?nprovidence ! 

"  Saint  Peter  knew,  that  competence  is  good, 
And  who  that  needs,  might  have  it  if  he  would; 
Or  he  would  not,  the  pious  spouse  compel 
To  it.  or  rank  beneath  the  infidel: 
Who  supplies  not,  his  house,  hath  both  denied 
His  faith)  in  Christ,  and  duty,  to  his  bride. 
The  cost  of  one  his  penitence  may  pay; — 
The  other,  doubtless,  will  provoke  a  fray. 

':  'Tis  therefore  clear,  that  industry  can  find 
Enough  for  comfort,  if  she's  so  inclined; 
And  with  Frugality,  to  tend  the  purse, 
Escape,  thine  own,  hereditary  curse. 
Nor  would  a  prudent  votary  of  mine 
Rely  on  either,  but  the  two  combine; 
Nor  venture  on  the  opposite  extreme. 
Since  Parsimony's  curse  is  not  a  dream, 

"  Invoke  Temperance  for  absolution, 

From  thy  deepest  and  un  holiest  stain; 

And  the  Deity  for  resolution, 

That,  henceforth,  thou  shall  not  relapse  again !- 

For,  of  thy  sources  of  replenishment, 

Intemperance  contributes  two  of  three, 

And  yet  affords  as  great  a  compliment. 

Or  greater,  to  the  ranks  of  beggary. 

Let  Virtue,  Morals  and  Integrity, 

With  Undefiled  Religion,  all  agree- 


To1  form  thy  character,  which,  though  rar& 
Jlmong  mankind,  is  not  at  all  too  fair ! 

Another  source  of  thy  peculiar  wo, 
Is  an  unconquerable  love  of  show; 
Thine  outside  gilt,  thou  carest  not  a  fly. 
Thine  inside,  being  filthy  as  a  sty ! 

"  Thou  hast  fed  Fashion  with  thy  humble  gain* 
And  been  despised  and  laugh'd  at  for  thy  pains: 
For  Opulence,  if  mean,  will  not  confess 
A  fit  companion,  in  thine  apishness. 
In  folly's  service,  thou  can'st  never  be 
An  equal  match  for  Aristocracy: 
Therefore  desist  from  acting  ns  its  tool. 
Nor  curse  thyself,  by  mimicking  a  fool ! 

"  The  biped,  man,  perchance,  may  take  the  whim, 
That  this  courtesy  is  designed,  for  him: 
But  with  that  favorite  of  Providence, 
Who  esteems  my  best  suggestions  nonsense, 
My  admonitions  have  been  withheld  long  since: 
And  though  thou  art  more  tractable  than  he. 
My  patience  hath  been  sorely  tried  by  thee ' 

"  'Tis  strange,  that  thou  should'st  still  remain  so  dull 

With  my  incessant  rapping  at  thy  skull; 

Nor,  can  it  be  disputed  that  thy  pate, 

Unless  -tis  human,  is  but  second-rate ! — 

For,  one  would  think  that  such  repeated  polls, 

Would  have  awakened  anything  but  dolts! 


"Thou  dost  complain,  that  thou   hast  wrought  for 
wealth  !      \i£t  owl  li*  !•  tea  M  .VarAMtf*  yiwtK 

What  else  would  have  as  well  preserved   thy  health  r 
For  he  can  never  labor  for  himselF.  •*  tStSO*  1 
Whose  life's  consumed,  in  worshipping  his  pelf; 
And  yet,  wealth^  time,  employed  to  count  its  store. 
Might  be  much  better  spent  in  earning  more  ! 
And  Competence  requires  but  little  time, 
To 


'•  Thy  .sweat  hath  also  irrigated  soil, 

Not  thine!—  It  cooled  and  fitted  thee  for  toil! 

Thou  sayest  Wealth  can  feast  on  a  ragout, 

While  thou  must  make  a  plainer  diet  do!  — 

And,  ii£iice.  thy  nether  limbs  can  stub  about,  '     ' 

While  Luxury's  are  crippled  with  the  gout: 

Nor  can  it  sleep  on  feathers,  half  so  sound, 

As  honest  industry  upon  the  ground  ! 

Neither  hath  Wrealth  effectual  defense, 

But  by  eternal,  anxious  vigilance: 

For  it  hath  wings,  which  it  doth  sometimes  use, 

Leaving  its  votary  3  danglin?  from  a  noose  !'; 

->d  0*41  «<d*mil  3io«i  )f«  i«Mil  riauodl  i,u/ 

"  With  these  suggestions,  of  the  woes  of  Wealth, 
Thou,  yet,  would'st  risk  them,  tho'  it  were  by  stealth: 
For  thou  dost  think,  with  human,  silly  things, 
That  thou  could'st  soar  to  Heav'n  with  golden  wings! 
But,  if  'tis  true,  what  Christ  and  prophets  tell. 
Such  wings  soar  not,  but  gravitate  to  hell': 
Nor  can  they  counteract  attraction  thence. 
Unless  they're  lightened  by  Benevolence  : 


Yet,  men  will  risk  a  journey  to  that  clinic, 
Rather  than  spare  the  fifth  part  of  a  dime! 

"Although  Jehovah  to  the  point  hath  spoken, 
Thou  art,  like  man,  distrustful  of  the  token: 
\ud,  as  tho'  thine  were  only  human  sense, 
No  test  will  answer  but  experience; 
Nor  yet  will  that,  unless  it  is  thine  own — 
By  that  of  others,  little  can  be  known! 

Thus  would  those  human  egotists  declare, 
Whose  folly  is  a  proverb,  everywhere, 
(Unless,  mayhap,  the  lunar  folks  should  be 
Inclined  to  approbate  their  lunacy#}m&-  i>*niojdim  »«J 
To  whom,  I've  constant  preached,  six  thousand  years, 
And  vainly,  as  though  asses  had  no  ears! 
vdtiow  off?   . '3£JBii^0«jL  sf>  j>^0^l  *}o  user  Mftf  ot  fMfldti) 
"  Among  this  race,  improvement  is  all  fudge; 
As  trudged  the  father,  so  the  son  doth  trudge; 
And  when  exception  offers  to  the  rule,  j 

Its  subject  is  admonished  as  a  fool!t»    -nisiu-yf  dttdw 
'iTftl  art!  noqu  JUiigiSt  fsidrrmiq  4 
"  I'll  now  leave  thee,  to  thy  contemplation 
Of  my  proposals  for  reformation! — 
Heed  my  precepts — remember  Amur's  prayer:^     , 
Thou  shalt  be  free,  as  spirits  of  the  air!" 

'*»I«MH  ao  yi^n 
Montpelier,  1839^^^^ 

rf  br  liw  eav,  -'indut 


FASHION'S  SOLILOQUY. 

1   ID/, 

— 

While  indulging  a  recent  exacerbation  of  literary 
.antiquarianism,  among  the  curiosities  of  my  great- 
great-grand-father's  ScrajvJSook;  I  casually  fell  upon 
the  subjoined  burlesque  of  the  fashionable  monoma- 
nia, of  Louis  14th  of  France:  And  for  which,  as  indi- 
cated hy  an  autographic  mariginal-note,  we  are  in- 
debted to  the  pen  of  Pere  de  Lachaise,  the  worthy 
Confessor  of  that  royal  friend,  and  zealous  patron,  of 
the  delirious  ostentation,  and  senseless  etiquette,  with 
which  Europe  was  bedizened,  for  near  a  century;  and 
which  remains,  at  least,  with  the  reflecting  moralist, 
a  proverbial  stigma  upon  the  Parisian,  to  the  present 
day;  And  however  inapplicable  to  the  good  people  of 
Vermont,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1830;  it  may,  not- 
withstanding, claim,  of  the  curious,  to  be  preserved 
as  a  literary  relic  of  the  seventeenth  century. 

The  following  may  be  received,  as,  very  nearly,  a 
literal  translation  of  the  Scrap-Book  copy,  which  is 
jttumbly  submitted  to  those  who  will  condescend  to 
read  it. 

ANTIQUARIAN/ 


"•  Reason,  that  sour  misanthrope,  yet  persists, 

In  her  senseless  contest,  for  dominion, 

O'er  those  unfeathtr-td  geese,  or  tailless  apes, 

Denominated,  by  tJiemselves,  mankind; 

As  though  her  monastic  melancholy, 

That  maddens  at  the  thought  of  earthly  bliss, 

And  calls  man's  pleasure  all  concupiscence — 

That  would  fe«d  his  enterprise,  with  shadows, 

And  pay  his  weariness,  with  hope-deferred, 

Could  vie,  with  my  felicitous  employ, 

That  pays  the  laborer  with  connate  joy! 

As  well  may  tasteless  Fountain-water  hope, 

To  supercede  delicious  Alcohol, 

Among  the  children  of  the  Temperate' 


*•  Her  vanity  is  inexhaustible; 

Or  she  would  have,  long1  since,  deemed  it  hopcle*?;, 

To  force  her  whims  on  Sensuality, 

The  true  synonym  of  Humanity; 

At  least,  with  those,  who  bow  at  Mammon's  shrine. 

And  think,  that  Wealth  makes  Man  a  Demigod: 

And  these  are  all  the  true  Nobility, 

Among  my  countless,  biped  worshippers— *• 

True  Pioneers,  to  that  Ostentation, 

To  which  the  Mimicry  of  Man  aspires- 

Thanks,  to  the  premature  development 
Of  those  exquisite)  apt  Propensities, 
Which  are  able  to  descry,  so  soon 
And  clearly,  my  superiority 
O'er  Reason,  as  the  Monitor  of  Man, 


Whose  unrestrained  indulgence  constitutes, 
With  singular  exceptions,  now  and  then, 
The  most  exquisite,  noble  enterprise, 
Of  thi.s  improvement  of  the  Baboon-Race! 


';  Dame  Nature  could  never  have  intended 
Man,  to  be  the  Proselyte  of  Reason;      rt«m  <•;!*.'.>  hnA 
For  else,  his  Appetites  would  have  been  wrought 
Less  dissonant  with  her  cold  suggestions, 
Which,  like  an  Iceberg  to  the  Mariner, 
Freeze  up  the  current  of  fictitious  enterprise. 
That  claims,  exclusively,  his  vigilance!  *  «A 

^oal  JL  utttttUfe  »fer*wfu«  oT 
"  Humanity  consists  of  sympathies, 
So  very  amiably  domestic, 
That  they  commence,  and  terminate, 
Within  the  circle  of  judicious  Selfishness  — 
Nor,  will  it,  soon,  be  so  improvident 
To  swop  the  smallest  Pleasure,  of  to-day,      «nJ  «IT 
For  the  mere  Image  of  the  richest  Bliss, 
That  Reason  paints  upon  To-morrow's  Map: 
So  incredulous  of  her  promises,  «1*  9**d3  beA 

Which  he  has,  most  judiciously,  esteemed, 
Too  spiritless^  and  fatuous,  to  test;  Of  ,41WWoi 
Is  that  two-legged  thing,  she  calls  her  Pet  ! 


'•  Man's  proverbial  Magnanimity,  d   ot 

Like  the  Philanthropy,  he  practices, 

Forms  a  Halo,  but  dimly  luminous,         <Uoi§  d*.iaV» 

Beyond  the  circle  of  his  private  views-HB^dK^iJa  hul^ 

Within,  it  shines,  with  treble  brilliancy, 


SI 

Its  focus  resting  where  his  soul  should  be, 
Disclosing,  'mongst  his  lesser  attributes, 
A  Pavonine,*  noble  Ostentation, 
That  contemns  Reason,  as  a  Lunatic, 
And  promises  eternal  vassalage, 
To  ajfable  Licentiousness  and  me ! 

"  That  Reason,  with  her  long  experience 

Of  Man's  suspicion  of  her  sanity, 

Should  still  persist,  in  importuning  him.  t$i)J  jjsdT 

Against  the  protest  of  his  Appetites, 

Which  are,  proverbially  obstinate, 

To  leave  those  easy  avenues  to  Bliss, 

That  stark-blind  Sensuality  can  thread, 

Unerringly,  as  with  old  Argus'  eyes, 

Ere  Juno  lent  them  to  the  Peacock's  tail; 

Where  they,  appropriately,  represent 

The  Moral  Vision  of  my  votaries, 

Seems  to  prove  her  really  insane! 

•'  In  spite  of  her  sepulchral  threatenings. 

And  yet,  without  an  effort  of  mine  own, 

I  have  entirely,  superseded  her, 

In  the  best  affections  of  human-kind. — 

Meanwhile,  by  turns,  she  mopes,  in  sullen  grief, 

Presently,  tornado-like,  she  blusters, 

Nor  foams,  less  madly,  than  a  Cataract, 

At  Man's  supreme  submissiveness  to  me! 


Peacock-like. 


••Bui,  fet  her  r:\ir,  exhort  ami  importune, 
L'ntil  hoarseness  shall  have  made  her  voiceless.. 
And  disappointment,  grief  and  wearim 
J>hall  ha\e  shrunk  her  Shrfwship  to  a  JWummy* 
My  triendc.  will  heed  her  jnst  about  a-*  well. 
As  modern  children  do  their  guardians' 
Dear  little  gentlefolk!  how  «mart  they  are. 
l>nme  Heason  may  assail  them,  if  she  dare! 
And,  ii*  she  dorit  get  trained,  \  will  admit. 
That  she  may  humanize  the  Monkeys  yet  !'" 


Bearing  date  lt>3U:  and  signed  Fouelteitr  I' 
Whipper  of  Maii^ifJ 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


5Jun'63AEH 

*~~"~     m 


<  I    7PM 


- 


5 


LD  21A-50m-ll,'62 
(D3279slO)476B 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


33. 


6  0  , 


170. 


. 

•  'V 


• 


* 


iii 


